The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Progesterone level in assisted reproductive technology - a systematic review and meta-analysis

Progesterone level in assisted reproductive technology - a systematic review and meta-analysis
Progesterone level in assisted reproductive technology - a systematic review and meta-analysis
Elevated progesterone (EP) or inadequate progesterone levels during ART cycle monitoring may lead to cycle cancellations or further progesterone supplementation, but practice varies. It remains controversial whether modifying clinical practice in the presence or absence of EP improves clinical outcomes. This systematic review aims to investigate if progesterone levels at different phases of fresh and frozen ART cycles influence pregnancy outcomes, in particular, that pertaining to day 3 versus day 5 embryo transfers. A systematic search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science identified studies from the year 2000. We included studies with women undergoing fresh and frozen IVF/ICSI cycles; with extractable per woman data on pregnancy outcomes where serum progesterone measurement was performed. We excluded interventional studies that influence clinical decisions or studies with donor cycles. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to determine the risk of bias. The primary outcome was LBR, and the secondary outcomes were OPR, CPR and MR. PICOS study protocol was used to include non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSI). Analysis was done using RevMan5 and the studies were pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird for random effects meta-analysis. The study was registered with PROSPERO (registration ID CRD42022382423). 64 studies (N=57,988 women) were included. In fresh cycles, there is no evidence that at baseline EP impacts LBR (P>1.5ng/ml, OR 0.76 [95% CI 0.39-1.49], 2 studies, N=309) and CPR (P>1.5ng/ml, OR 0.81 [0.38-1.71], 2 studies, N=309). EP at ovulation trigger is associated with a lower LBR (P>1.0ng/ml, OR 0.40 [0.23-0.69], 2 studies, N=2805) and CPR (P>1.0ng/ml, OR 0.49 [0.42-0.58], 3 studies, N=3323; P>1.1ng/ml, OR 0.66 [0.53-0.83], 2 studies, N=2444; P>1.2ng/ml, OR 0.61 [0.39-0.96], 6 studies, N=844; P>1.5ng/ml, OR 0.37 [0.17-0.81], 6 studies, N=13870; P>2.0ng/ml, OR 0.43 [0.31-0.59], 3 studies, N=1949) with D3 embryo but not D5 [LBR (P>1.5ng/ml, OR 1.02 [0.74-1.39], 3 studies, N=5174) and CPR (P>1.5ng/ml, OR 0.88 [0.67-1.14], 6 studies, N=5705)]. We could not meaningfully meta-analyse studies on the day of egg collection in fresh cycles, embryo transfer in fresh cycles, trigger or before ovulation in natural FET cycles and FET cycles due to significant study heterogeneity. We acknowledged the limitations on including studies post year 2000 and the exclusion of studies with multiple observations, which may result in inherent publication bias and some confounding factors uncontrolled for. In conclusion, in controlled ovarian stimulation, EP at baseline did not impact on LBR; EP at ovulation trigger is associated with a lower LBR for D3 but not for D5 embryo transfer. In FET cycles, as the studies were heterogeneous, we were unable to combine the data in a meaningful way. This review is sponsored by Complete Fertility and the Ministry of Health, Malaysia.
Assisted reproductive technology, Embryo transfer, Intracytoplasmic sperm injection, In vitro fertilization, Pregnancy outcomes, Serum progesterone
2045-2322
Lim, Yee Cherng
0d9c3b78-6e21-4fbd-90f7-a1919e71d1f7
Hamdan, Mukhri
6f04236f-8113-40c1-8391-e21fd32c8209
Maheshwari, Abha
ec3e24a4-c2ce-4b48-aac7-475fc569dd90
Cheong, Ying
4efbba2a-3036-4dce-82f1-8b4017952c83
Lim, Yee Cherng
0d9c3b78-6e21-4fbd-90f7-a1919e71d1f7
Hamdan, Mukhri
6f04236f-8113-40c1-8391-e21fd32c8209
Maheshwari, Abha
ec3e24a4-c2ce-4b48-aac7-475fc569dd90
Cheong, Ying
4efbba2a-3036-4dce-82f1-8b4017952c83

Lim, Yee Cherng, Hamdan, Mukhri, Maheshwari, Abha and Cheong, Ying (2024) Progesterone level in assisted reproductive technology - a systematic review and meta-analysis. Scientific Reports, 14, [30826].

Record type: Article

Abstract

Elevated progesterone (EP) or inadequate progesterone levels during ART cycle monitoring may lead to cycle cancellations or further progesterone supplementation, but practice varies. It remains controversial whether modifying clinical practice in the presence or absence of EP improves clinical outcomes. This systematic review aims to investigate if progesterone levels at different phases of fresh and frozen ART cycles influence pregnancy outcomes, in particular, that pertaining to day 3 versus day 5 embryo transfers. A systematic search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science identified studies from the year 2000. We included studies with women undergoing fresh and frozen IVF/ICSI cycles; with extractable per woman data on pregnancy outcomes where serum progesterone measurement was performed. We excluded interventional studies that influence clinical decisions or studies with donor cycles. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to determine the risk of bias. The primary outcome was LBR, and the secondary outcomes were OPR, CPR and MR. PICOS study protocol was used to include non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSI). Analysis was done using RevMan5 and the studies were pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird for random effects meta-analysis. The study was registered with PROSPERO (registration ID CRD42022382423). 64 studies (N=57,988 women) were included. In fresh cycles, there is no evidence that at baseline EP impacts LBR (P>1.5ng/ml, OR 0.76 [95% CI 0.39-1.49], 2 studies, N=309) and CPR (P>1.5ng/ml, OR 0.81 [0.38-1.71], 2 studies, N=309). EP at ovulation trigger is associated with a lower LBR (P>1.0ng/ml, OR 0.40 [0.23-0.69], 2 studies, N=2805) and CPR (P>1.0ng/ml, OR 0.49 [0.42-0.58], 3 studies, N=3323; P>1.1ng/ml, OR 0.66 [0.53-0.83], 2 studies, N=2444; P>1.2ng/ml, OR 0.61 [0.39-0.96], 6 studies, N=844; P>1.5ng/ml, OR 0.37 [0.17-0.81], 6 studies, N=13870; P>2.0ng/ml, OR 0.43 [0.31-0.59], 3 studies, N=1949) with D3 embryo but not D5 [LBR (P>1.5ng/ml, OR 1.02 [0.74-1.39], 3 studies, N=5174) and CPR (P>1.5ng/ml, OR 0.88 [0.67-1.14], 6 studies, N=5705)]. We could not meaningfully meta-analyse studies on the day of egg collection in fresh cycles, embryo transfer in fresh cycles, trigger or before ovulation in natural FET cycles and FET cycles due to significant study heterogeneity. We acknowledged the limitations on including studies post year 2000 and the exclusion of studies with multiple observations, which may result in inherent publication bias and some confounding factors uncontrolled for. In conclusion, in controlled ovarian stimulation, EP at baseline did not impact on LBR; EP at ovulation trigger is associated with a lower LBR for D3 but not for D5 embryo transfer. In FET cycles, as the studies were heterogeneous, we were unable to combine the data in a meaningful way. This review is sponsored by Complete Fertility and the Ministry of Health, Malaysia.

Text
Manuscript - clean - Accepted Manuscript
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (105kB)
Text
s41598-024-81539-z - Version of Record
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (6MB)
Text
s41598-024-81539-z (1) - Version of Record
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (6MB)
Text
Figures
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (1MB)
Text
Supplementary material
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (118kB)
Text
Table
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (46kB)

Show all 6 downloads.

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 27 November 2024
e-pub ahead of print date: 28 December 2024
Keywords: Assisted reproductive technology, Embryo transfer, Intracytoplasmic sperm injection, In vitro fertilization, Pregnancy outcomes, Serum progesterone

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 496912
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/496912
ISSN: 2045-2322
PURE UUID: 488de707-332f-4c84-973e-bc3862419fde
ORCID for Ying Cheong: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-7687-4597

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 08 Jan 2025 12:46
Last modified: 22 Aug 2025 01:58

Export record

Contributors

Author: Yee Cherng Lim
Author: Mukhri Hamdan
Author: Abha Maheshwari
Author: Ying Cheong ORCID iD

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×