Is There a Role for Estradiol With Progesterone in Luteal Phase Support With Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Cycles? A Retrospective Controlled Study With Reviewing the Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Luteal phase support (LPS) after intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) is a mandatory step. Progesterone is the standard LPS. There is a debate as regards the use of estradiol. The present study was conducted to evaluate the effect of adding estradiol to LPS on pregnancy rate in patients treated by ICSI. Methods: A retrospective controlled study was conducted on 68 infertile females scheduled for ICSI through the luteal long agonist protocol. They were divided into two groups as regards the LPS: group 1 (control): 42 patients using progesterone injections intramuscular (100 mg daily) together with two vaginal pessaries 400 mg daily twice daily; group 2 (estradiol): 26 patients where midluteal oral 4 mg estradiol valerate tablet in addition to progesterone as group 1 was used. Clinical pregnancy rate was the primary outcome. Results: There was no significant difference between the two studied groups as regards number of MII oocytes, the cleavage rate, number of embryos and number of class A embryos. As regards the pregnancy rate, it was higher in the estradiol group than in the control group but did not reach the statistical significance, 16 of 26 (61.5%) and 20 of 42 (47.6%) in the treated group versus non-treated group (P = 0.264). Conclusion: Since estradiol level declines in the midluteal phase, patients could benefit from adding estradiol to progesterone in LPS, and at that time the effect of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) used for ovulation triggering on the corpus luteum decreases. The benefit includes an increase in the probability of pregnancy. There is a need for further RCTs that will assess the effect of estrogen addition to progesterone during the luteal phase on the probability of pregnancy. J Clin Gynecol Obstet. 2015;4(2):226-231 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jcgo333w
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".