ArticleJournal of ovarian research2025
Spontaneous ovulation, hormonal profiles, and the impact of progesterone timing variation on outcomes in natural proliferative phase frozen embryo transfer cycles with single euploid blastocyst transfer.
Article in Journal of ovarian research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNatural cycle frozen embryo transfer (NC-FET) lowers obstetric risks by preserving ovulation and corpus luteum but limits scheduling flexibility. Natural proliferative phase FET (NPP-FET) offers a scheduling-friendly alternative, assuming ovulation is maintained after flexible progesterone (P4) initiation during the follicular phase. Only three peer-reviewed studies have investigated NPP-FET protocols, yet none verified spontaneous ovulation, characterized hormonal dynamics, or evaluated whether variation in P4 initiation timing influences clinical outcomes. Preserving spontaneous ovulation is essential for NPP-FET to replicate the physiologic benefits of NC-FET; confirming its consistency is critical to validating NPP-FET as a viable protocol. To our knowledge, this is the first study to comprehensively address these gaps, providing novel evidence to support NPP-FET's clinical feasibility.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 196 first-time NPP-FET cycles with single euploid blastocyst transfers between January 2023 and October 2024. Dydrogesterone (40 mg/day) was initiated upon meeting the following criteria: leading follicle ≥ 14 mm, endometrial thickness ≥ 7 mm, serum estradiol > 150 pg/mL, and P4 < 1.5 ng/mL. Ultrasound and hormonal monitoring continued until ultrasound-documented ovulation (UDO), followed by three days of hormone assessments. Ovulation was confirmed by UDO and serum P4 > 3.0 ng/mL. Embryo transfer occurred on day 6 of dydrogesterone exposure. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated associations between pregnancy outcomes and P4 timing-related variables, including follicular phase duration, estradiol and follicular diameter at P4 initiation, P4 start-to-UDO interval, UDO-to-FET interval, and serum P4 on FET day.
resultsSpontaneous ovulation was confirmed in all participants. Median follicular diameter one day before UDO was 18.6 mm. UDO occurred within 1-2 days in 96.4% and 92.2% of cases based on two LH surge criteria. Peri-ovulatory hormone profiles resembled natural cycles. Clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, and clinical loss rates were 66.3%, 58.7%, and 11.5%, respectively. Embryo morphology and biopsy day predicted pregnancy outcomes, while P4 timing-related variables showed no association.
conclusionsFlexible dydrogesterone initiation at follicular diameters ≥ 14 mm, based on predefined criteria, preserves spontaneous ovulation and natural hormonal dynamics. Pregnancy outcomes were consistent across P4 initiation timings, supporting NPP-FET as a clinically viable, physiologically grounded, and scheduling-friendly protocol.
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.