In vitro fertilization
|
In vitro
fertilization
|
In vitro fertilization
|
In vitro fertilization
|
In vitro
fertilization
|
Colwell & Tummon 199115
|
RCT / 39
|
CC + hMG
|
Oral NMP 200 mg qds vs
No luteal support
|
Serum P levels higher in oral NMP group vs no-luteal-support
group on days 2, 4 and 11 (all p < 0.001).
Mean ± SD duration of luteal phase longer after oral NMP (17.0 ± 1.3
vs 13.7 ± 3.0 days, p < 0.05).
No significant difference in ongoing pregnancy rates (20% vs
0%).
|
Pouly et al. 199616
|
RCT / 283
|
hMG
|
Oral NMP (100 mg in am, 200 mg in pm) vs Vaginal NMP 8% (90
mg/day)
|
Mean ± SD blood P level higher in oral NMP group vs vaginal NMP
group on day 8 (50.9 ± 81.9 vs 29.9 ± 56.4 ng/mL, p
< 0.001).
No differences between oral NMP and vaginal NMP groups for rates of
implantation (29.9% vs 35.3%), clinical pregnancy on day 30
(25.0% vs 28.8%), ongoing pregnancy on day 90 (22.9% vs
25.9%), abortion after day 90 (3.0% vs 11.1%), deliveries per
patient (22.2% vs 23.0%) or deliveries per embryo transferred
(11.1% vs 11.7%).
|
Friedler et al. 199917
|
RCT / 64
|
GnRH + hMG
|
Oral NMP 200 mg qds vs Vaginal NMP 100 mg bd
|
No difference in serum P levels between groups in conception cycles.
Higher serum P levels on days 11 and 15 in oral NMP group vs
vaginal NMP in non-conception cycles (p = 0.032).
Lower implantation rate with oral NMP vs vaginal NMP (10.7%
vs 30.7%, p < 0.01), but no significant
differences in rates of pregnancy (33.0% vs 47.0%), miscarriage
(40.0% vs 12.5%), or ongoing pregnancy (20.0% vs
41.1%).
|
Licciardi et al. 199918
|
RCT / 43
|
GnRH down-regulation, FSH or hMG or FSH + hMG
|
Oral NMP 200 mg tds vs IM P 50 mg/day
|
No difference in serum P levels between groups.
Lower implantation rate with oral NMP vs IM P (18.1% vs
40.9%, p = 0.004).
No difference in clinical pregnancy rates (45.8% vs
57.9%).
|
Tomic et al. 201119
|
Case–control / 370
|
GnRH agonist, FSH
|
Oral NMP 100 mg tds + Vaginal NMP 8% (90 mg/day) vs
Vaginal NMP 8% (90 mg/day)
|
No difference in ongoing pregnancy rate between combination of oral +
vaginal NMP vs vaginal NMP alone (39.5% vs 33.5%,
p = .48), but lower abortion rate with combination therapy
vs monotherapy (6.4% vs 15.6%, p <
0.05).
|
Intrauterine insemination |
Intrauterine insemination |
Intrauterine insemination |
Intrauterine
insemination |
Intrauterine insemination |
Güven et al. 201622
|
OL, OB / 591
|
FSH
|
Oral NMP 100 mg bd vs
No luteal support
|
All patients had unexplained infertility.
Evaluation of IUI cycles that developed a single follicle.
Higher clinical pregnancy rate in oral NMP group vs
no-luteal-support group (24.3% versus 15.0%, p = 0.021).
Higher live-birth rate in oral NMP group vs control group (19.8%
vs 9.8%, p = 0.004).
|
Chi et al. 201623
|
RET, OB / 1779
|
Not availableb
|
Oral NMP vs
Vaginal NMP vs
DYDb
|
No difference in rates of biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy,
early miscarriage, or ectopic pregnancy between recipients of oral NMP
vs vaginal NMP vs DYD.
|
Malhotra & Krishnaprasad 201612
|
OL, OB / 78
|
CC + hMG
|
Oral NMP-SR 200 or 300 mg od vs
Oral DYD 10 mg bd
|
All patients had unexplained infertility.
In the first cycle, mid-luteal serum P levels of ≥ 14 ng/mL were
achieved in 82.2% of oral NMP-SR recipients vs 78.8% of DYD
recipients.
Biochemically-confirmed pregnancy rate in the first cycle was 11% in
oral NMP-SR group vs 30% in DYD group.
|
Gopinath & Desai 201420
|
OL, OB / 60
|
Natural or stimulated (CC ± hMG)
|
Oral NMP-SR 400 mg/day vs
Oral DYD 10 mg bd
|
All patients had unexplained infertility.
In the first cycle, mean serum P levels were maintained at ≥ 14 ng/mL in
the mid-luteal phase in 93.3% of patients (oral NMP-SR 90.0% vs
DYD 96.7%).
Overall first-cycle biochemically-confirmed pregnancy rate 5% (oral
NMP-SR 6.7% vs DYD 3.3%).
Possible reasons for the low pregnancy rate were monofollicular
development in patients undergoing natural IUI cycles, a trend towards a
low motility fraction, and evaluation of the first cycle only.
|