ReviewCureus2025
Comparing Dydrogesterone Versus Medroxyprogesterone in Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation (PPOS) for Patients Undergoing In Vitro Fertilization/Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07348757 (Comparison of rFSH Alone Versus rFSH+rLH in Dydrogesterone-Based Progestin Protocol Cycles), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Comparison of rFSH Alone Versus rFSH+rLH in Dydrogesterone-Based Progestin Protocol Cycles
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Progestogen-primed ovarian stimulation vs GnRH antagonists and/or agonists for women undergoing assisted reproduction: systematic review and meta-analysis.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dydrogesterone (DYG) in the progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol is an alternative progestin with weaker pituitary suppression than medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) in women with normal ovulation. However, the endocrinological characteristics, oocyte retrieval, and pregnancy outcomes of DYG in PPOS patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) remain unclear. This systematic review aimed to compare the efficacy of DYG and MPA in PPOS protocols in IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. Studies published between 2018 and 2024 were identified through PubMed and the Cochrane Library. After screening and applying the eligibility criteria, only full-text articles directly comparing DYG and MPA in PPOS protocols for IVF/ICSI were included. A total of three studies involving 1,172 patients were analyzed. Both DYG and MPA effectively suppressed premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surges, with no significant differences in the oocyte yield, fertilization rates, or clinical pregnancy rates. DYG was associated with slightly higher post-trigger follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) levels and lower LH levels compared to MPA, while both groups showed similar estradiol and progesterone trends. Some studies reported significantly lower gonadotropin requirements in the DYG group. Pregnancy outcomes, including biochemical and clinical pregnancy rates, implantation, and miscarriage, were comparable between groups. These findings indicate that both DYG and MPA are effective and safe for LH surge suppression in PPOS protocols, with DYG potentially offering a more physiologic hormonal profile and reduced gonadotropin use. Further randomized controlled trials are recommended to validate these results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.