Cargando…
Luteal Phase Support in IVF: Comparison Between Evidence-Based Medicine and Real-Life Practices
Background: Luteal phase support (LPS) in assisted reproduction cycles has been widely investigated in recent years. Although progesterone represents the preferential product for luteal phase supplementation in cycles with fresh embryo transfer, there is ongoing debate as to when to start, which is...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7461775/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33013681 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2020.00500 |
_version_ | 1783576786752241664 |
---|---|
author | Di Guardo, Federica Midassi, Habib Racca, Annalisa Tournaye, Herman De Vos, Michel Blockeel, Christophe |
author_facet | Di Guardo, Federica Midassi, Habib Racca, Annalisa Tournaye, Herman De Vos, Michel Blockeel, Christophe |
author_sort | Di Guardo, Federica |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Luteal phase support (LPS) in assisted reproduction cycles has been widely investigated in recent years. Although progesterone represents the preferential product for luteal phase supplementation in cycles with fresh embryo transfer, there is ongoing debate as to when to start, which is the best route, dosage and duration, and whether there is a place for additional agents. Nevertheless, fertility specialists do not always adhere to evidence-based recommendations in their clinical practice. The aim of this worldwide web-based survey is to document the currently used protocols for luteal phase support and appraisal tendencies of drug prescription behavior and to compare these to the existing evidence-based literature. Material and Methods: A questionnaire was developed and sent by secure e-mail to 1,480 clinicians involved in ART worldwide. One hundred and forty-eighth clinicians from 34 countries returned completed questionnaires. Results: Progesterone support is usually started on the day of oocyte retrieval. Eighty percent of clinicians applied the administration of vaginal progesterone only. Intramuscular progesterone was prescribed by 6%, while oral progestin or subcutaneous progesterone were each prescribed by 5% of clinicians, respectively. Progesterone was administered until 8-10 weeks' gestation by 35% and 12 weeks by 52% of respondents. Conclusions: Vaginal administration was the preferred route for luteal phase support. The reported emerging use of the oral route confirms the expected shift in clinical practice as a result of recent evidence showing a reassuring safety score of oral progestins. In spite of the lack of evidence supporting the continuation of luteal support until 12 weeks' gestation, this practice was adhered to by more than half of the clinicians surveyed, highlighting the difference between evidence-based medicine and real-life practices. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7461775 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74617752020-10-01 Luteal Phase Support in IVF: Comparison Between Evidence-Based Medicine and Real-Life Practices Di Guardo, Federica Midassi, Habib Racca, Annalisa Tournaye, Herman De Vos, Michel Blockeel, Christophe Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Endocrinology Background: Luteal phase support (LPS) in assisted reproduction cycles has been widely investigated in recent years. Although progesterone represents the preferential product for luteal phase supplementation in cycles with fresh embryo transfer, there is ongoing debate as to when to start, which is the best route, dosage and duration, and whether there is a place for additional agents. Nevertheless, fertility specialists do not always adhere to evidence-based recommendations in their clinical practice. The aim of this worldwide web-based survey is to document the currently used protocols for luteal phase support and appraisal tendencies of drug prescription behavior and to compare these to the existing evidence-based literature. Material and Methods: A questionnaire was developed and sent by secure e-mail to 1,480 clinicians involved in ART worldwide. One hundred and forty-eighth clinicians from 34 countries returned completed questionnaires. Results: Progesterone support is usually started on the day of oocyte retrieval. Eighty percent of clinicians applied the administration of vaginal progesterone only. Intramuscular progesterone was prescribed by 6%, while oral progestin or subcutaneous progesterone were each prescribed by 5% of clinicians, respectively. Progesterone was administered until 8-10 weeks' gestation by 35% and 12 weeks by 52% of respondents. Conclusions: Vaginal administration was the preferred route for luteal phase support. The reported emerging use of the oral route confirms the expected shift in clinical practice as a result of recent evidence showing a reassuring safety score of oral progestins. In spite of the lack of evidence supporting the continuation of luteal support until 12 weeks' gestation, this practice was adhered to by more than half of the clinicians surveyed, highlighting the difference between evidence-based medicine and real-life practices. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-08-18 /pmc/articles/PMC7461775/ /pubmed/33013681 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2020.00500 Text en Copyright © 2020 Di Guardo, Midassi, Racca, Tournaye, De Vos and Blockeel. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Endocrinology Di Guardo, Federica Midassi, Habib Racca, Annalisa Tournaye, Herman De Vos, Michel Blockeel, Christophe Luteal Phase Support in IVF: Comparison Between Evidence-Based Medicine and Real-Life Practices |
title | Luteal Phase Support in IVF: Comparison Between Evidence-Based Medicine and Real-Life Practices |
title_full | Luteal Phase Support in IVF: Comparison Between Evidence-Based Medicine and Real-Life Practices |
title_fullStr | Luteal Phase Support in IVF: Comparison Between Evidence-Based Medicine and Real-Life Practices |
title_full_unstemmed | Luteal Phase Support in IVF: Comparison Between Evidence-Based Medicine and Real-Life Practices |
title_short | Luteal Phase Support in IVF: Comparison Between Evidence-Based Medicine and Real-Life Practices |
title_sort | luteal phase support in ivf: comparison between evidence-based medicine and real-life practices |
topic | Endocrinology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7461775/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33013681 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2020.00500 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT diguardofederica lutealphasesupportinivfcomparisonbetweenevidencebasedmedicineandreallifepractices AT midassihabib lutealphasesupportinivfcomparisonbetweenevidencebasedmedicineandreallifepractices AT raccaannalisa lutealphasesupportinivfcomparisonbetweenevidencebasedmedicineandreallifepractices AT tournayeherman lutealphasesupportinivfcomparisonbetweenevidencebasedmedicineandreallifepractices AT devosmichel lutealphasesupportinivfcomparisonbetweenevidencebasedmedicineandreallifepractices AT blockeelchristophe lutealphasesupportinivfcomparisonbetweenevidencebasedmedicineandreallifepractices |