黄体酮在体外受精中的黄体期支持:阴道和直肠子宫托与阴道胶囊的比较:一项随机对照研究

M. Khrouf, Soufiene Slimani, M. Khrouf, Marouen Braham, M. Bouyahia, K. Berjeb, Hanène Chaabane, G. Merdassi, A. Kaffel, A. Zhioua, F. Zhioua
{"title":"黄体酮在体外受精中的黄体期支持:阴道和直肠子宫托与阴道胶囊的比较:一项随机对照研究","authors":"M. Khrouf, Soufiene Slimani, M. Khrouf, Marouen Braham, M. Bouyahia, K. Berjeb, Hanène Chaabane, G. Merdassi, A. Kaffel, A. Zhioua, F. Zhioua","doi":"10.4137/CMWH.S32156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND In IVF, Luteal phase support is usually performed using vaginal progesterone. A part of patients using this route reports being uncomfortable with this route. We tried to study whether the rectal route could be an effective alternative and associated with less discomfort. PATIENTS AND METHODS A prospective randomized controlled study. All patient were eligible for IVF treatment for infertility. After oocyte pickup, 186 patients were allocated to one the following protocols for luteal phase support: (i) rectal pessaries group: natural progesterone pessaries administered rectally 200 mg three times a day, (ii) vaginal pessaries group: natural progesterone pessaries administered vaginally 200 mg three times a day), and (iii) vaginal capsules group: natural micronized progesterone capsules administered vaginally 200 mg three times a day. On the day of pregnancy test, patients were asked to fill in a questionnaire conducted by an investigator in order to assess the tolerability and side effects of the LPS treatment taken. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of perineal irritation. RESULTS Fifty eight patients were assigned to the rectal pessaries group, 68 patients to the vaginal pessaries group, and 60 patients to the vaginal capsules group. All patients adhered to their allocated treatment. Implantation and clinical pregnancy rates per transfer did not differ between the three groups. Perineal irritation, which was our primary endpoint, was the same for all the three groups (respectively 1.7 % versus 5.9 % versus 11.7%). Regarding the other side effects, more patients experienced constipation and flatulence with the rectal route, whereas more patients reported vaginal discharge in the vaginal capsules group. CONCLUSION Rectal administration for luteal phase support is effective and well accepted alternative to vaginal route.","PeriodicalId":90142,"journal":{"name":"Clinical medicine insights. Women's health","volume":"9 1","pages":"43 - 47"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Progesterone for Luteal Phase Support in In Vitro Fertilization: Comparison of Vaginal and Rectal Pessaries to Vaginal Capsules: A Randomized Controlled Study\",\"authors\":\"M. Khrouf, Soufiene Slimani, M. Khrouf, Marouen Braham, M. Bouyahia, K. Berjeb, Hanène Chaabane, G. Merdassi, A. Kaffel, A. Zhioua, F. Zhioua\",\"doi\":\"10.4137/CMWH.S32156\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND In IVF, Luteal phase support is usually performed using vaginal progesterone. A part of patients using this route reports being uncomfortable with this route. We tried to study whether the rectal route could be an effective alternative and associated with less discomfort. PATIENTS AND METHODS A prospective randomized controlled study. All patient were eligible for IVF treatment for infertility. After oocyte pickup, 186 patients were allocated to one the following protocols for luteal phase support: (i) rectal pessaries group: natural progesterone pessaries administered rectally 200 mg three times a day, (ii) vaginal pessaries group: natural progesterone pessaries administered vaginally 200 mg three times a day), and (iii) vaginal capsules group: natural micronized progesterone capsules administered vaginally 200 mg three times a day. On the day of pregnancy test, patients were asked to fill in a questionnaire conducted by an investigator in order to assess the tolerability and side effects of the LPS treatment taken. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of perineal irritation. RESULTS Fifty eight patients were assigned to the rectal pessaries group, 68 patients to the vaginal pessaries group, and 60 patients to the vaginal capsules group. All patients adhered to their allocated treatment. Implantation and clinical pregnancy rates per transfer did not differ between the three groups. Perineal irritation, which was our primary endpoint, was the same for all the three groups (respectively 1.7 % versus 5.9 % versus 11.7%). Regarding the other side effects, more patients experienced constipation and flatulence with the rectal route, whereas more patients reported vaginal discharge in the vaginal capsules group. CONCLUSION Rectal administration for luteal phase support is effective and well accepted alternative to vaginal route.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90142,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical medicine insights. Women's health\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"43 - 47\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical medicine insights. Women's health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4137/CMWH.S32156\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical medicine insights. Women's health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4137/CMWH.S32156","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

背景:在体外受精中,黄体期支持通常使用阴道黄体酮。使用这种方法的一部分患者报告说,这种方法不舒服。我们试图研究直肠途径是否可以成为一种有效的替代方法,并减少不适。患者和方法一项前瞻性随机对照研究。所有患者均符合体外受精治疗不孕症的条件。提取卵母细胞后,186名患者被分配到以下黄体期支持方案之一:(i)直肠子宫托组:每天三次直肠给予天然孕酮子宫托200毫克,(ii)阴道子宫托组:每天三次阴道给予天然孕酮子宫托200毫克,(iii)阴道胶囊组:每天三次阴道给予天然微化孕酮胶囊200毫克。在妊娠试验当天,患者被要求填写一份调查问卷,以评估所采取的LPS治疗的耐受性和副作用。主要终点是会阴刺激的发生。结果直肠子宫托组58例,阴道子宫托组68例,阴道胶囊组60例。所有的病人都坚持接受分配的治疗。每次移植的植入率和临床妊娠率在三组之间没有差异。会阴刺激,这是我们的主要终点,在所有三组中是相同的(分别为1.7%、5.9%和11.7%)。至于其他副作用,更多的患者在直肠途径出现便秘和胀气,而阴道胶囊组更多的患者报告阴道分泌物。结论直肠给药对黄体期的支持是阴道途径的有效替代。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Progesterone for Luteal Phase Support in In Vitro Fertilization: Comparison of Vaginal and Rectal Pessaries to Vaginal Capsules: A Randomized Controlled Study
BACKGROUND In IVF, Luteal phase support is usually performed using vaginal progesterone. A part of patients using this route reports being uncomfortable with this route. We tried to study whether the rectal route could be an effective alternative and associated with less discomfort. PATIENTS AND METHODS A prospective randomized controlled study. All patient were eligible for IVF treatment for infertility. After oocyte pickup, 186 patients were allocated to one the following protocols for luteal phase support: (i) rectal pessaries group: natural progesterone pessaries administered rectally 200 mg three times a day, (ii) vaginal pessaries group: natural progesterone pessaries administered vaginally 200 mg three times a day), and (iii) vaginal capsules group: natural micronized progesterone capsules administered vaginally 200 mg three times a day. On the day of pregnancy test, patients were asked to fill in a questionnaire conducted by an investigator in order to assess the tolerability and side effects of the LPS treatment taken. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of perineal irritation. RESULTS Fifty eight patients were assigned to the rectal pessaries group, 68 patients to the vaginal pessaries group, and 60 patients to the vaginal capsules group. All patients adhered to their allocated treatment. Implantation and clinical pregnancy rates per transfer did not differ between the three groups. Perineal irritation, which was our primary endpoint, was the same for all the three groups (respectively 1.7 % versus 5.9 % versus 11.7%). Regarding the other side effects, more patients experienced constipation and flatulence with the rectal route, whereas more patients reported vaginal discharge in the vaginal capsules group. CONCLUSION Rectal administration for luteal phase support is effective and well accepted alternative to vaginal route.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信