• We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information

Table 33Methods for luteal support - progesterone formulations

StudyInterventionsNEfficacy
Clinical Pregnancy Ongoing Pregnancy/Live Birth
Rel EffLower 95% CIUpper 95% CIRel EffLower 95% CIUpper 95% CI
Vaginal vs. intramuscular
Propst et al., 2001250ReferenceProgesterone gel108
IM progesterone991.620.942.812.051.133.73
Unfer et al., 2004251ReferenceVaginal progesterone373
Intramuscular 17-hydroxyprogesterone3611.591.272.001.501.171.92
Miscarriage rate IM compared to vaginal 0.33 (0.2, 0.55)
Vaginal vs. oral
Chakravarty et al., 2005252ReferenceVaginal micronized progesterone351
Oral dygesterone791.060.681.23---
Vaginal formulations
Kleinstein and Luteal Phase Study Group, 2005253ReferenceVaginal progesterone gel212
Vaginal progesterone in oil2181.140.811.60---
Geber et al., 2007254ReferenceMicronized progesterone capsules122
Micronized progesterone gel1221.230.901.671.240.871.77
Ludwig et al., 2002255Reference Micronized progesterone capsules 53
Micronized progesterone gel731.520.782.961.450.712.98
Tay and Lenton, 2005256Reference Progesterone vaginal capsules 55
Progesterone rectal350.990.531.85---
Progesterone gel361.030.561.89--
hCG350.990.531.85---
Zegers-Hochschild et al., 2000257ReferenceIM progesterone262
Vaginal ring2431.000.791.26---
Ng et al., 2003258Reference Progesterone suppository 30
Progesterone gel300.710.222.25---
Patient preference for gel

From: 3, Results

Cover of Effectiveness of Assisted Reproductive Technology
Effectiveness of Assisted Reproductive Technology.
Evidence Reports/Technology Assessments, No. 167.
Myers ER, McCrory DC, Mills AA, et al.

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.