Skip to main content
Log in

Luteal-phase support in stimulated cycles in an in vitro fertilization/embryo transfer program: Progesterone versus human chorionic gonadotropin

  • Special Contributions
  • Published:
Journal of in Vitro Fertilization and Embryo Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A study was undertaken to compare the hormonal parameters [serum concentrations of estradiol (E2), and progesterone (P) and P/E2 ratios] of patients undergoing in vitro fertilization/embryo transfer to whom either progesterone in oil or human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) was administered as luteal support. Seventeen patients were studied in 20 cycles. In 10 randomly assigned cycles 25 mg of intramuscular progesterone in oil was administered daily from the day of embryo transfer (day +4) until day +18. In the other 10 cycles, 1500 IU of hCG was given intramuscularly on days +4, +7, +10, and +13. Even when accounting for the differences in recruitment in the two groups, the hCG-treated group had significantly higher concentrations of serum P (P<0.01) and E2 (P<0.05) during the luteal phase. The luteal P/E2 ratios were higher in the progesterone-treated group because of the lower E2 levels in that group, although the difference was not statistically significant. The ratio of the mean luteal P to the preovulatory serum E2 was significantly higher in the hCG-treated group (P<0.01). There were three clinical pregnancies in the hCG-treated group. We conclude that (1) higher P concentrations are achieved with hCG treatment than with progesterone treatment during the luteal phase; (2) high luteal P/E2 ratios per se may not be an important determinant of implantation; (3) progesterone production by the corpus luteum is not maximal in progesterone-treated cycles; and (4) the usefulness of hCG as a luteal support agent should be further evaluated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Huang KE, Muechler EK, Schwartz FK, Goggin M, Graham M: Serum progesterone levels in women treated with human menopausal gonadotropin and human chorionic gonadotropin for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1986;46:903–906

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gidley-Baird AA, O'Neill C, Sinosich MJ, Porter RN, Pike IL, Suanders DM: Failure of implantation in human in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer patients: The effects of altered progesterone/estrogen ratios in humans and mice. Fertil Steril 1986;45:69–74

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lejeune B, Camus M, Deschacht J, Leroy F: Differences in the luteal phases after failed or successful in vitro fertilization and embryo replacement. J Vitro Fert Embryo Transfer 1986;3:358–365

    Google Scholar 

  4. O'Neill C, Ferrier AJ, Vaughan J, Sinosich MJ, Saunders DM: Causes of implantation failure after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Lancet 1985;2:615

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Syrop CH, Hammond MG: Diurnal variations in midluteal serum progesterone measurements. Fertil Steril 1987;47:67–70

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nader, S., Berkowitz, A.S., Ochs, D. et al. Luteal-phase support in stimulated cycles in an in vitro fertilization/embryo transfer program: Progesterone versus human chorionic gonadotropin. J Assist Reprod Genet 5, 81–84 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01130663

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01130663

Key words

Navigation