The efficiency of progesterone vaginal gel versus intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase supplementation in gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles: a prospective clinical trial

Non-randomised trial OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 1 in-corpus citation
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-06-13 ⓘ

This prospective clinical trial compared the efficiency of progesterone vaginal gel versus intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase supplementation in women undergoing gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

We compared the efficiency of progesterone vaginal gel (PVG) with intramuscular progesterone (IMP) supplementation for luteal phase support after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer in gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist cycles. The treatment outcomes were similar for PVG and IMP for luteal support in GnRH-antagonist protocols. With its ease of use, high tolerability by patients, and fewer side effects, PVG can be a successful alternative to IMP.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

MeSH descriptors

Fertilization in Vitro Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Luteal Phase Ovulation Induction Progesterone Progestins Administration, Intravaginal Adult Embryo Transfer Female Fertilization in Vitro Gels Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Humans Injections, Intramuscular Luteal Phase Ovulation Induction Pregnancy Progesterone Progestins

Citation neighborhood (sparse)

Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.

Cites (2)

Cited by (1)

References (20)

Cited by (1)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-10-08T21:07:04.513278+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-09-17T06:32:46.214484+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK