Taze Sikluslarda Endometriumun Hazırlanması

Fatemi HM, Popovic-Todorovic B, Papanikolaou E, et al. An update of luteal phase support in stimulated IVF cycles. Human reproduction update. England; 2007;13(6): 581–590. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmm021

Yanushpolsky EH. Luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization. Seminars in reproductive medicine. United States; 2015;33(2): 118–127. doi:10.1055/s-0035-1545363

Fauser BCJM, Devroey P. Reproductive biology and IVF: ovarian stimulation and luteal phase consequences. Trends in endocrinology and metabolism: TEM. United States; 2003;14(5): 236–242. doi:10.1016/s1043-2760(03)00075-4

Beckers NGM, Macklon NS, Eijkemans MJ, et al. Nonsupplemented luteal phase characteristics after the administration of recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin, recombinant luteinizing hormone, or gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist to induce final oocyte maturation in in vitro fertilizati. The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism. United States; 2003;88(9): 4186–4192. doi:10.1210/jc.2002-021953

van der Linden M, Buckingham K, Farquhar C, et al. Luteal phase support for assisted reproduction cycles. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. England; 2015;2015(7): CD009154. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009154.pub3

Kuhl H. Pharmacology of estrogens and progestogens: influence of different routes of administration. Climacteric : the journal of the International Menopause Society. England; 2005;8 Suppl 1: 3–63. doi:10.1080/13697130500148875

Rižner TL, Brožič P, Doucette C, et al. Selectivity and potency of the retroprogesterone dydrogesterone in vitro. Steroids. United States; 2011;76(6): 607–615. doi:10.1016/j.steroids.2011.02.043

Tournaye H, Sukhikh GT, Kahler E, et al. A Phase III randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy, safety and tolerability of oral dydrogesterone versus micronized vaginal progesterone for luteal support in in vitro fertilization. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). England; 2017;32(5): 1019–1027. doi:10.1093/humrep/dex023

Griesinger G, Blockeel C, Sukhikh GT, et al. Oral dydrogesterone versus intravaginal micronized progesterone gel for luteal phase support in IVF: a randomized clinical trial. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). England; 2018;33(12): 2212–2221. doi:10.1093/humrep/dey306

Barbosa MWP, Valadares NPB, Barbosa ACP, et al. Oral dydrogesterone vs. vaginal progesterone capsules for luteal-phase support in women undergoing embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JBRA assisted reproduction. Brazil; 2018;22(2): 148–156. doi:10.5935/1518-0557.20180018

Tomic V, Tomic J, Klaic DZ, et al. Oral dydrogesterone versus vaginal progesterone gel in the luteal phase support: randomized controlled trial. European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology. Ireland; 2015;186: 49–53. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.11.002

Cicinelli E, de Ziegler D. Transvaginal progesterone: evidence for a new functional ‘portal system’ flowing from the vagina to the uterus. Human reproduction update. England; 1999;5(4): 365–372. doi:10.1093/humupd/5.4.365

Bourgain C, Devroey P, Van Waesberghe L, et al. Effects of natural progesterone on the morphology of the endometrium in patients with primary ovarian failure. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). England; 1990;5(5): 537–543. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137138

Child T, Leonard SA, Evans JS, et al. Systematic review of the clinical efficacy of vaginal progesterone for luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology cycles. Reproductive biomedicine online. Netherlands; 2018;36(6): 630–645. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2018.02.001

Yanushpolsky E, Hurwitz S, Greenberg L, et al. Crinone vaginal gel is equally effective and better tolerated than intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles: a prospective randomized study. Fertility and sterility. United States; 2010;94(7): 2596–2599. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.02.033

Dal Prato L, Bianchi L, Cattoli M, et al. Vaginal gel versus intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase supplementation: a prospective randomized trial. Reproductive biomedicine online. Netherlands; 2008;16(3): 361–367. doi:10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60597-4

Zarutskie PW, Phillips JA. A meta-analysis of the route of administration of luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology: vaginal versus intramuscular progesterone. Fertility and sterility. United States; 2009;92(1): 163–169. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.02.018

Vaisbuch E, Leong M, Shoham Z. Progesterone support in IVF: is evidence-based medicine translated to clinical practice? A worldwide web-based survey. Reproductive biomedicine online. Netherlands; 2012;25(2): 139–145. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.04.005

Lockwood G, Griesinger G, Cometti B. Subcutaneous progesterone versus vaginal progesterone gel for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization: a noninferiority randomized controlled study. Fertility and sterility. United States; 2014;101(1): 112-119.e3. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.09.010

Baker VL, Jones CA, Doody K, et al. A randomized, controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of aqueous subcutaneous progesterone with vaginal progesterone for luteal phase support of in vitro fertilization. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). England; 2014;29(10): 2212–2220. doi:10.1093/humrep/deu194

Connell MT, Szatkowski JM, Terry N, et al. Timing luteal support in assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review. Fertility and sterility. United States; 2015;103(4): 939-946.e3. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.12.125

Sohn SH, Penzias AS, Emmi AM, et al. Administration of progesterone before oocyte retrieval negatively affects the implantation rate. Fertility and sterility. United States; 1999;71(1): 11–14. doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(98)00404-x

Williams SC, Oehninger S, Gibbons WE, et al. Delaying the initiation of progesterone supplementation results in decreased pregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization: a randomized, prospective study. Fertility and sterility. United States; 2001;76(6): 1140–1143. doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(01)02914-4

Kol S. Time, time, time: see what governs the luteal phase endocrinology. Gynecological endocrinology : the official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Endocrinology. England; 2021;37(9): 775–777. doi:10.1080/09513590.2021.1939297

Zhao J, Hao J, Li Y. Individualized luteal phase support after fresh embryo transfer: unanswered questions, a review. Reproductive health. England; 2022;19(1): 19. doi:10.1186/s12978-021-01320-7

Labarta E, Mariani G, Rodríguez-Varela C, et al. Individualized luteal phase support normalizes live birth rate in women with low progesterone levels on the day of embryo transfer in artificial endometrial preparation cycles. Fertility and sterility. United States; 2022;117(1): 96–103. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.08.040

Thomsen LH, Kesmodel US, Erb K, et al. The impact of luteal serum progesterone levels on live birth rates-a prospective study of 602 IVF/ICSI cycles. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). England; 2018;33(8): 1506–1516. doi:10.1093/humrep/dey226

Pabuçcu E, Pabuçcu R, Gürgan T, et al. Luteal phase support in fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles. Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction. 2020;49(10): 101838. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogoh.2020.101838

Tavaniotou A, Devroey P. Luteal hormonal profile of oocyte donors stimulated with a GnRH antagonist compared with natural cycles. Reproductive biomedicine online. Netherlands; 2006;13(3): 326–330. doi:10.1016/s1472-6483(10)61435-6

Zhang X-M, Lv F, Wang P, et al. Estrogen supplementation to progesterone as luteal phase support in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization: systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine. United States; 2015;94(8): e459. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000000459

Pinheiro LMA, Cândido P da S, Moreto TC, et al. Estradiol use in the luteal phase and its effects on pregnancy rates in IVF cycles with GnRH antagonist: a systematic review. JBRA assisted reproduction. Brazil; 2017;21(3): 247–250. doi:10.5935/1518-0557.20170046

Scheffer JB, Scheffer BB, Carvalho RF de, et al. A comparison of the effects of three luteal phase support protocols with estrogen on in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer outcomes in patients on a GnRH antagonist protocol. JBRA assisted reproduction. Brazil; 2019;23(3): 239–245. doi:10.5935/1518-0557.20190012

Munjal R, Gupta S. Addition of oestradiol to progesterone for luteal phase support in GnRh antagonist IVF/ICSI cycles. Fertility Science and Research. 2019;6(1). https://journals.lww.com/fsar/fulltext/2019/06010/addition_of_oestradiol_to_progesterone_for_luteal.7.aspx

Huang N, Situ B, Chen X, et al. Meta-analysis of estradiol for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertility and sterility. United States; 2015;103(2): 367-73.e5. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.10.029

Kol S. A Rationale for Timing of Luteal Support Post Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonist Trigger. Gynecologic and obstetric investigation. Switzerland; 2019;84(1): 1–5. doi:10.1159/000491088

Elgindy EA, Sibai H, Mostafa MI, et al. Towards an optimal luteal support modality in agonist triggered cycles: a randomized clinical trial. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). England; 2018;33(6): 1079–1086. doi:10.1093/humrep/dey054

Safrai M, Hertsberg S, Ben-Meir A, et al. Dydrogesterone supplementation in addition to routine micronized progesterone administration for luteal support in cycles triggered with lone GnRH agonist results in an acceptable pregnancy rate and avoids the need to freeze embryos. Minerva obstetrics and gynecology. Italy; 2023;75(1): 39–44. doi:10.23736/S2724-606X.21.04954-X

Ioannidou PG, Bosdou JK, Lainas GT, et al. How frequent is severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome after GnRH agonist triggering in high-risk women? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Reproductive biomedicine online. Netherlands; 2021;42(3): 635–650. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.11.008

Lawrenz B, Ruiz F, Engelmann N, et al. Individual luteolysis post GnRH-agonist-trigger in GnRH-antagonist protocols. Gynecological endocrinology : the official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Endocrinology. England; 2017;33(4): 261–264. doi:10.1080/09513590.2016.1266325

Lawrenz B, Humaidan P, Kol S, et al. GnRHa trigger and luteal coasting: a new approach for the ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome high-risk patient? Reproductive biomedicine online. Netherlands; 2018;36(1): 75–77. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.09.014

Fatemi HM, Popovic-Todorovic B, Papanikolaou E, et al. An update of luteal phase support in stimulated IVF cycles. Human reproduction update. England; 2007;13(6): 581–590. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmm021

Yanushpolsky EH. Luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization. Seminars in reproductive medicine. United States; 2015;33(2): 118–127. doi:10.1055/s-0035-1545363

Fauser BCJM, Devroey P. Reproductive biology and IVF: ovarian stimulation and luteal phase consequences. Trends in endocrinology and metabolism: TEM. United States; 2003;14(5): 236–242. doi:10.1016/s1043-2760(03)00075-4

Beckers NGM, Macklon NS, Eijkemans MJ, et al. Nonsupplemented luteal phase characteristics after the administration of recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin, recombinant luteinizing hormone, or gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist to induce final oocyte maturation in in vitro fertilizati. The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism. United States; 2003;88(9): 4186–4192. doi:10.1210/jc.2002-021953

van der Linden M, Buckingham K, Farquhar C, et al. Luteal phase support for assisted reproduction cycles. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. England; 2015;2015(7): CD009154. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009154.pub3

Kuhl H. Pharmacology of estrogens and progestogens: influence of different routes of administration. Climacteric : the journal of the International Menopause Society. England; 2005;8 Suppl 1: 3–63. doi:10.1080/13697130500148875

Rižner TL, Brožič P, Doucette C, et al. Selectivity and potency of the retroprogesterone dydrogesterone in vitro. Steroids. United States; 2011;76(6): 607–615. doi:10.1016/j.steroids.2011.02.043

Tournaye H, Sukhikh GT, Kahler E, et al. A Phase III randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy, safety and tolerability of oral dydrogesterone versus micronized vaginal progesterone for luteal support in in vitro fertilization. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). England; 2017;32(5): 1019–1027. doi:10.1093/humrep/dex023

Griesinger G, Blockeel C, Sukhikh GT, et al. Oral dydrogesterone versus intravaginal micronized progesterone gel for luteal phase support in IVF: a randomized clinical trial. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). England; 2018;33(12): 2212–2221. doi:10.1093/humrep/dey306

Barbosa MWP, Valadares NPB, Barbosa ACP, et al. Oral dydrogesterone vs. vaginal progesterone capsules for luteal-phase support in women undergoing embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JBRA assisted reproduction. Brazil; 2018;22(2): 148–156. doi:10.5935/1518-0557.20180018

Tomic V, Tomic J, Klaic DZ, et al. Oral dydrogesterone versus vaginal progesterone gel in the luteal phase support: randomized controlled trial. European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology. Ireland; 2015;186: 49–53. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.11.002

Cicinelli E, de Ziegler D. Transvaginal progesterone: evidence for a new functional ‘portal system’ flowing from the vagina to the uterus. Human reproduction update. England; 1999;5(4): 365–372. doi:10.1093/humupd/5.4.365

Bourgain C, Devroey P, Van Waesberghe L, et al. Effects of natural progesterone on the morphology of the endometrium in patients with primary ovarian failure. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). England; 1990;5(5): 537–543. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137138

Child T, Leonard SA, Evans JS, et al. Systematic review of the clinical efficacy of vaginal progesterone for luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology cycles. Reproductive biomedicine online. Netherlands; 2018;36(6): 630–645. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2018.02.001

Yanushpolsky E, Hurwitz S, Greenberg L, et al. Crinone vaginal gel is equally effective and better tolerated than intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles: a prospective randomized study. Fertility and sterility. United States; 2010;94(7): 2596–2599. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.02.033

Dal Prato L, Bianchi L, Cattoli M, et al. Vaginal gel versus intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase supplementation: a prospective randomized trial. Reproductive biomedicine online. Netherlands; 2008;16(3): 361–367. doi:10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60597-4

Zarutskie PW, Phillips JA. A meta-analysis of the route of administration of luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology: vaginal versus intramuscular progesterone. Fertility and sterility. United States; 2009;92(1): 163–169. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.02.018

Vaisbuch E, Leong M, Shoham Z. Progesterone support in IVF: is evidence-based medicine translated to clinical practice? A worldwide web-based survey. Reproductive biomedicine online. Netherlands; 2012;25(2): 139–145. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.04.005

Lockwood G, Griesinger G, Cometti B. Subcutaneous progesterone versus vaginal progesterone gel for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization: a noninferiority randomized controlled study. Fertility and sterility. United States; 2014;101(1): 112-119.e3. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.09.010

Baker VL, Jones CA, Doody K, et al. A randomized, controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of aqueous subcutaneous progesterone with vaginal progesterone for luteal phase support of in vitro fertilization. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). England; 2014;29(10): 2212–2220. doi:10.1093/humrep/deu194

Connell MT, Szatkowski JM, Terry N, et al. Timing luteal support in assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review. Fertility and sterility. United States; 2015;103(4): 939-946.e3. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.12.125

Sohn SH, Penzias AS, Emmi AM, et al. Administration of progesterone before oocyte retrieval negatively affects the implantation rate. Fertility and sterility. United States; 1999;71(1): 11–14. doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(98)00404-x

Williams SC, Oehninger S, Gibbons WE, et al. Delaying the initiation of progesterone supplementation results in decreased pregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization: a randomized, prospective study. Fertility and sterility. United States; 2001;76(6): 1140–1143. doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(01)02914-4

Kol S. Time, time, time: see what governs the luteal phase endocrinology. Gynecological endocrinology : the official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Endocrinology. England; 2021;37(9): 775–777. doi:10.1080/09513590.2021.1939297

Zhao J, Hao J, Li Y. Individualized luteal phase support after fresh embryo transfer: unanswered questions, a review. Reproductive health. England; 2022;19(1): 19. doi:10.1186/s12978-021-01320-7

Labarta E, Mariani G, Rodríguez-Varela C, et al. Individualized luteal phase support normalizes live birth rate in women with low progesterone levels on the day of embryo transfer in artificial endometrial preparation cycles. Fertility and sterility. United States; 2022;117(1): 96–103. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.08.040

Thomsen LH, Kesmodel US, Erb K, et al. The impact of luteal serum progesterone levels on live birth rates-a prospective study of 602 IVF/ICSI cycles. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). England; 2018;33(8): 1506–1516. doi:10.1093/humrep/dey226

Pabuçcu E, Pabuçcu R, Gürgan T, et al. Luteal phase support in fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles. Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction. 2020;49(10): 101838. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogoh.2020.101838

Tavaniotou A, Devroey P. Luteal hormonal profile of oocyte donors stimulated with a GnRH antagonist compared with natural cycles. Reproductive biomedicine online. Netherlands; 2006;13(3): 326–330. doi:10.1016/s1472-6483(10)61435-6

Zhang X-M, Lv F, Wang P, et al. Estrogen supplementation to progesterone as luteal phase support in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization: systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine. United States; 2015;94(8): e459. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000000459

Pinheiro LMA, Cândido P da S, Moreto TC, et al. Estradiol use in the luteal phase and its effects on pregnancy rates in IVF cycles with GnRH antagonist: a systematic review. JBRA assisted reproduction. Brazil; 2017;21(3): 247–250. doi:10.5935/1518-0557.20170046

Scheffer JB, Scheffer BB, Carvalho RF de, et al. A comparison of the effects of three luteal phase support protocols with estrogen on in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer outcomes in patients on a GnRH antagonist protocol. JBRA assisted reproduction. Brazil; 2019;23(3): 239–245. doi:10.5935/1518-0557.20190012

Munjal R, Gupta S. Addition of oestradiol to progesterone for luteal phase support in GnRh antagonist IVF/ICSI cycles. Fertility Science and Research. 2019;6(1). https://journals.lww.com/fsar/fulltext/2019/06010/addition_of_oestradiol_to_progesterone_for_luteal.7.aspx

Huang N, Situ B, Chen X, et al. Meta-analysis of estradiol for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertility and sterility. United States; 2015;103(2): 367-73.e5. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.10.029

Kol S. A Rationale for Timing of Luteal Support Post Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonist Trigger. Gynecologic and obstetric investigation. Switzerland; 2019;84(1): 1–5. doi:10.1159/000491088

Elgindy EA, Sibai H, Mostafa MI, et al. Towards an optimal luteal support modality in agonist triggered cycles: a randomized clinical trial. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). England; 2018;33(6): 1079–1086. doi:10.1093/humrep/dey054

Safrai M, Hertsberg S, Ben-Meir A, et al. Dydrogesterone supplementation in addition to routine micronized progesterone administration for luteal support in cycles triggered with lone GnRH agonist results in an acceptable pregnancy rate and avoids the need to freeze embryos. Minerva obstetrics and gynecology. Italy; 2023;75(1): 39–44. doi:10.23736/S2724-606X.21.04954-X

Ioannidou PG, Bosdou JK, Lainas GT, et al. How frequent is severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome after GnRH agonist triggering in high-risk women? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Reproductive biomedicine online. Netherlands; 2021;42(3): 635–650. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.11.008

Lawrenz B, Ruiz F, Engelmann N, et al. Individual luteolysis post GnRH-agonist-trigger in GnRH-antagonist protocols. Gynecological endocrinology : the official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Endocrinology. England; 2017;33(4): 261–264. doi:10.1080/09513590.2016.1266325

Lawrenz B, Humaidan P, Kol S, et al. GnRHa trigger and luteal coasting: a new approach for the ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome high-risk patient? Reproductive biomedicine online. Netherlands; 2018;36(1): 75–77. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.09.014