 |
|
Subcutaneous progesterone versus vaginal progesterone for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization: A retrospective analysis from daily clinical practice
Marcel Schütt, The Duy Nguyen, Martha Kalff-Suske, Uwe Wagner, Georg Macharey, Volker Ziller
Clin Exp Reprod Med. 2021;48(3):262-267. Published online 2021 Aug 9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2020.04021
|
|
Citations to this article as recorded by
 Comparing the outcomes of in-vitro fertilization in patients receiving vaginal, subcutaneous, and intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase support: a three-armed randomized controlled trial
Ensieh Shahrokh Tehraninejad, Sanaz Alizadeh, Elham Azimi Nekoo, Nikan Zargarzadeh, Mamak Shariat, Fedyeh Haghollahi, Azadeh Tarafdari, Mohammadamin Parsaei
BMC Women's Health.2024;[Epub] CrossRef Comparison of the efficacy of subcutaneous versus vaginal progesterone using a rescue protocol in vitrified blastocyst transfer cycles
Hakan Yarali, Sezcan Mumusoglu, Mehtap Polat, Murat Erden, Irem Yarali Ozbek, Sandro C. Esteves, Peter Humaidan
Reproductive BioMedicine Online.2023; 47(3): 103233. CrossRef Systematic use of long-acting intramuscular progesterone in addition to oral dydrogesterone as luteal phase support for single fresh blastocyst transfer: A pilot study
Virginie Simon, Geoffroy Robin, Laura Keller, Camille Ternynck, Sophie Jonard, Camille Robin, Christine Decanter, Pauline Plouvier
Frontiers in Endocrinology.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
|