Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1991 Jan;55(1):131-9.
doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)54072-2.

Evaluation of luteal support therapy in a randomized controlled study within a gamete intrafallopian transfer program

Affiliations
Free article
Clinical Trial

Evaluation of luteal support therapy in a randomized controlled study within a gamete intrafallopian transfer program

J L Yovich et al. Fertil Steril. 1991 Jan.
Free article

Abstract

A randomized controlled study of luteal support therapy (using intramuscular injections of progesterone and/or human chorionic gonadotropin) was conducted in a trial designed to minimize variables that might adversely affect the change of pregnancy. After applying rigid selection criteria, 207 women were recruited into one of four groups. Mathematical modeling was applied to the results to determine if there were degrees of improvement in uterine receptivity relative to various grades of embryo quality ("E" factor). Although the trial size was insufficient to enable the detection of significant improvements in the pregnancy rates that ranged from 27.5% for non-treatment to 41.2% for those receiving combined treatment, the birth rates were significantly better with luteal support (11.8% versus 29.4%). Similarly, the overall implantation rate just failed to reach statistical significance for luteal support, but the ongoing implantations were significantly better (3.6% versus 9.0%). Data modeling indicated that luteal support, particularly with the combined regimen, could improve the ongoing implantation rate by up to 2.5-fold when the E factor was poorest.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

LinkOut - more resources