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
Review
. 2025 Jun 13;17(6):e85959.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.85959. eCollection 2025 Jun.

Comparing Dydrogesterone Versus Medroxyprogesterone in Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation (PPOS) for Patients Undergoing In Vitro Fertilization/Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection: A Systematic Review

R Muharam  1   2 , Alisha Nurdya Nurdya  1 , Edward C Yo  1 , Kanadi Sumapraja  1   2 , Achmad Kemal Harzif  1   2 , Mila Maidarti  1   2 , Budi Wiweko  1   2 , Andon Hestiantoro  1   2
Affiliations
Review

Comparing Dydrogesterone Versus Medroxyprogesterone in Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation (PPOS) for Patients Undergoing In Vitro Fertilization/Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection: A Systematic Review

R Muharam et al. Cureus. .

Abstract

Dydrogesterone (DYG) in the progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol is an alternative progestin with weaker pituitary suppression than medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) in women with normal ovulation. However, the endocrinological characteristics, oocyte retrieval, and pregnancy outcomes of DYG in PPOS patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) remain unclear. This systematic review aimed to compare the efficacy of DYG and MPA in PPOS protocols in IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. Studies published between 2018 and 2024 were identified through PubMed and the Cochrane Library. After screening and applying the eligibility criteria, only full-text articles directly comparing DYG and MPA in PPOS protocols for IVF/ICSI were included. A total of three studies involving 1,172 patients were analyzed. Both DYG and MPA effectively suppressed premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surges, with no significant differences in the oocyte yield, fertilization rates, or clinical pregnancy rates. DYG was associated with slightly higher post-trigger follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) levels and lower LH levels compared to MPA, while both groups showed similar estradiol and progesterone trends. Some studies reported significantly lower gonadotropin requirements in the DYG group. Pregnancy outcomes, including biochemical and clinical pregnancy rates, implantation, and miscarriage, were comparable between groups. These findings indicate that both DYG and MPA are effective and safe for LH surge suppression in PPOS protocols, with DYG potentially offering a more physiologic hormonal profile and reduced gonadotropin use. Further randomized controlled trials are recommended to validate these results.

Keywords: dydrogesterone; in vitro fertilization; intracytoplasmic sperm injection; medroxyprogesterone; ovarian hyperstimulation; progestin primed ovarian stimulation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram of searching on selected studies
*Studies identified from specific databases; **Studies excluded after full-text review for not meeting the inclusion criteria.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Risk of bias summary
[13-15]
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Fertility and infertility: definition and epidemiology. Vander Borght M, Wyns C. http://10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2018.03.012. Clin Biochem. 2018;62:2–10. - PubMed
    1. Survey on ART and IUI: legislation, regulation, funding and registries in European countries: the European IVF-monitoring Consortium (EIM) for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) Calhaz-Jorge C, De Geyter CH, Kupka MS, et al. https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoz044. Hum Reprod Open. 2020;2020:0. - PMC - PubMed
    1. New twists in ovarian stimulation and their practical implications. Pirtea P, de Ziegler D, Poulain M, Ayoubi JM. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2019.00197. Front Med (Lausanne) 2019;6:197. - PMC - PubMed
    1. A systematic review of randomized trials for the treatment of poor ovarian responders: is there any light at the end of the tunnel? Polyzos NP, Devroey P. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:1058–1061. - PubMed
    1. Medroxyprogesterone acetate is an effective oral alternative for preventing premature luteinizing hormone surges in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization. Kuang Y, Chen Q, Fu Y, et al. http://10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.03.022. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:62–70. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources