CONTEXT:Recurrent miscarriages, the loss of three or more consecutive intrauterine pregnancies before 20 weeks of gestation with the same partner, affect 1%–1.5% of the pregnant population. The inadequate secretion of progesterone in early pregnancy has been proposed as a cause of recurrent miscarriages.AIMS:The aim was to investigate the efficacy of progesterone supplementation in patients with unexplained recurrent miscarriages.SETTINGS AND DESIGN:This was a 9-year cohort study of women with otherwise unexplained recurrent miscarriages who attended a recurrent miscarriage clinic in a tertiary care university hospital.SUBJECTS AND METHODS:Women with at least three unexplained recurrent miscarriages were included in the study. They were divided into three groups according to their initial and 48-h repeat progesterone levels. For women with inadequate endogenous progesterone secretion, natural progesterone vaginal pessaries 400 mg 12-hourly were offered until 12 weeks gestation.STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:Proportions and 95% confidence intervals calculated for categorical variables and the chi-square test were used to show statistical significance. Medians and ranges were calculated for noncontinuous variables.RESULTS:Pregnancy cycles (n = 203) were analyzed to examine the miscarriage rate following progesterone supplementation. Overall live birth and miscarriage rates were 63% and 36%, respectively. When analyzed by the number of previous miscarriages there was a reduction in the miscarriage rate following progesterone supplementation in women with 4 previous miscarriages when compared with historical data.CONCLUSIONS:Progesterone supplementation may have beneficial effects in women with otherwise unexplained recurrent miscarriages.

Data from 107 women undergoing their first IVF/ICSI were analyzed. Relationships between antimullerian hormone (AMH) and follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) were analyzed after dividing patients into four groups according to AMH/FSH levels. Concordance was noted in 57% of women (both AMH/FSH either normal or abnormal) while 43%of women had discordant values (AMH/FSH one hormone normal and the other abnormal). Group 1 (AMH and FSH in normal range) and group 2 (normal AMH and high FSH) were younger compared to group 3 (low AMH and normal FSH) and group 4 (both AMH/FSH abnormal). Group 1 showing the best oocyte yield was compared to the remaining three groups. Groups 3 and 4 required higher dose of gonadotrophins for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation showing their low ovarian reserve. There was no difference in cycle cancellation, clinical pregnancy, and live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate in all groups. These tests are useful to predict ovarian response but whether AMH is a substantially better predictor is not yet established.