SynthesisJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2025
A comparison of the effects of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol and gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Progestogen-primed ovarian stimulation vs GnRH antagonists and/or agonists for women undergoing assisted reproduction: systematic review and meta-analysis.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluating progestin-primed and GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation protocols in PGT-A cycles: implications for clinical practice.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Medroxyprogesterone acetate vs. GnRH antagonist for preventing premature LH surge during ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technology: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Article
- Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to compare the effects of the progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol and gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-A) protocol in women with different ovarian reserves who underwent assisted reproductive technology (ART).
methodsWe searched published studies in the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, CNKI, and CBM databases. Patients in the experimental group underwent the PPOS protocol, and those in the control group underwent the GnRH-A protocol. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised controlled trials (N-RCTs) of PPOS and GnRH-A protocols were collected. We searched the literature published until November 1, 2024. A subgroup analysis was performed for patients with different ovarian reserves.
resultsThis study included 36 studies. The primary outcome showed that the live birth rate was similar between the PPOS and GnRH-A groups. In the high ovarian response (HOR) patients, the incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) was significantly lower in the PPOS protocol group than in the GnRH-A group [OR = 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.12-0.48, p < 0.0001]. In the secondary outcomes, the endometrial thickness in the PPOS protocol group decreased compared with the GnRH-A group (mean difference (MD) = - 1.13, 95% CI = - 1.76 to - 0.51, p = 0.0004). In the HOR subgroup, gonadotropin (Gn) dose (MD = 222.88, 95% CI = 59.30-386.46, p = 0.008) and duration (MD = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.48-0.92, p < 0.00001) were increased in the PPOS protocol group compared with the GnRH-A protocol group. In the normal ovarian response (NOR) subgroup, the number of viable embryos in the PPOS protocol group was greater than that in the GnRH-A group (MD = 2.00, 95% CI = 0.10-3.90, p = 0.04).
conclusionThe PPOS protocol had similar clinical effects to the GnRH-A protocol. In HOR patients, the Gn duration and dose in the PPOS protocol group increased, whereas OHSS incidence was reduced. Meanwhile, in NOR patients, the number of viable embryos in the PPOS protocol group increased. The PPOS protocol can be widely promoted in clinical practice when patients do not choose to proceed with fresh embryo transfer due to their own circumstances.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.