Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
BioMed Research International
Volume 2017 (2017), Article ID 3616875, 10 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/3616875
Review Article

The Influence of Oral Dydrogesterone and Vaginal Progesterone on Threatened Abortion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

1Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
2Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
3Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
4Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hallym University Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Correspondence should be addressed to Banghyun Lee; rk.ro.myllah@eelnuyhgnab

Received 24 April 2017; Revised 24 June 2017; Accepted 23 November 2017; Published 17 December 2017

Academic Editor: Kotaro Kitaya

Copyright © 2017 Hee Joong Lee et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Objective. To conduct systematic analyses to evaluate the efficacy of progesterone therapy for the prevention of miscarriages in pregnant women experiencing threatened abortion. Methods. In November 2016, we performed a systematic literature search and identified 51 articles in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. We identified nine randomized trials that included 913 pregnant women (including 322 treated with oral dydrogesterone, 213 treated with vaginal progesterone, and 378 control subjects) who met the selection criteria. Results. The incidence of miscarriage was significantly lower in the total progesterone group than in the control group (13.0% versus 21.7%; odds ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.36 to 0.78; ; , 0%). Moreover, the incidence of miscarriage was significantly lower in the oral dydrogesterone group than in the control group (11.7% versus 22.6%; odds ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.71; ; , 0%) and was lower in the vaginal progesterone group than in the control group, although this difference was nonsignificant (15.4% versus 20.3%; odds ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.34; ; , 0%). However, the incidence of miscarriage was not different between the oral dydrogesterone and vaginal progesterone groups. Conclusion. Progesterone therapy, especially oral dydrogesterone, can effectively prevent miscarriage in pregnant women experiencing threatened abortion.