17. Traver S., Scalici E., Mullet T., et al. Cell-free DNA in human follicular microenvironment: new prognostic biomarker to predict in vitro fertilization outcomes [Electronic resource]. PLoS One. 2015; 10 (8). Article ID e0136172. URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0136172
18. Do J.W., Lee Y.W., Park H.J., Park Y.S. The effectiveness of Hyaluronic Acid + Sodium Carboxymethyl Cellulose in the prevention of intrauterine adhesion after intrauterine surgery. J Korean Gyneral Endosc Minim Invasive Surg. 2005; 17: 112-7.
19. Popov A.A., et al. Intrauterine synechiae. Russkiy meditsinskiy zhurnal [Russian Medical Journal] 2017; 26. URL: https://www.rmj.ru/ar-ticles/ginekologiya/Vnutrimatochnye_sinehii_vek_spustya/
20. Russian medicinal reference book. Antiadgezin gel anti-adhesive absorbable sterile. URL: http://www.rlsnet.ru/pcr_tn_id_81752.htm (in Russian)
21. Yarilin A., Fedenko E. et al. “Laennek” - a drug based on the hydro-lyzate of the human placenta. Infektsionnyye metody v kosmetologii [Injection methods in cosmetology]. 2010; 4: 30-2. (in Russian)
22. Gromova O.A., et al. Molecular mechanisms of action extracts of the human placenta on skin pigmentation.Vestnik esteticheskoy meditsiny [Bulletin Aesthetic Medicine]. 2012; 11 (3): 70-7. (in Russian).
23. Zhidomirov N. et al. Experimental study of the effect of the drug “Laennek” on the regeneration processes in the skin.Les Nouvelles Esthetiques. 2011; 3: 6-9. (in Russian)
24. Togashi S., Tokahashi N. et al. Antioxidative collagen-derived peptides in human-placenta axtract. Placenta. 2002; 23 (6): 497-502. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12137748/
25. Garg R., Zahra F., et al. A comparative study of injection placentrex and conventional therapy in treatment of pelvic inflammatory disease // J. Indian Med. Assoc. 2008. Vol. 106, N 7. P. 463, 467. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18975504/
26. Cicinelli E., Matteo M., Tinelli R., et al. Chronic endometritis due to common bacteria is prevalent in women with recurrent miscarriage as confirmed by improved pregnancy outcome after antibiotic treatment. Reprod Sci. 2014; 21 (5): 640-7. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258214650_Chronic_Endometritis_Due_to_Common_Bacteria_Is_Prevalent_in_Women_With_Recurrent_Miscarriage_as_Confirmed_by_Improved_Pregnancy_Outcome_After_Antibiotic_Treatment
27. Assisted reproductive technologies and artificial insemination. Clinical guidelines of ROAG.Moscow, 2019. 119 p. (in Russian)
28. Ovarian Stimulation in IVF/ICSI. Guideline of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). 2019. 136 p. URL: https://www.eshre.eu/Guidelines-and-Legal/Guidelines/Ovarian-Stimula-tion-in-IVF-ICSI
29. Bosch E., Broer S., Griesinger G., Grynberg M., Humaidan P. et al.; ESHRE Guideline Group on Ovarian Stimulation. ESHRE guideline: ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI. Hum Reprod Open. 2020; 2. Article ID hoaa009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoaa009 PMID: 32395637
30. van der Linden M., Buckingham K., Farquhar C., KremerJ.A., MetwallyM. Lutealphase support for assisted reproduction cycles. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2015; 7. CD009154. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858
31. Barbosa M.W., Silva L.R., Navarro P.A., Ferriani R.A., Nastri C.O., Martins W.P. Dydrogesterone vs progesterone for luteal-phase support: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ultrasound Ob-stet Gynecol. 2016; 48: 161-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.15814
32. Chakravarty B.N., Shirazee H.H., Dam P., Goswami S.K., Chatterjee R., Ghosh S. Oral dydrogesterone versus intravaginal micronised progesterone as luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles: results of a randomized study. J Steroid Biochem Mol. Biol. 2005; 97: 41620. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/jjsbmb.2005.08.012
33. Patki A., Pawar V.C. Modulating fertility outcome in assisted reproductive technologiesby the use of dydrogesterone. Gynecol Endocrinol 2007; 23, suppl. 1: 68-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09513590701584857
34. Griesinger G., Blockeel C., Kahler E., Pexman-Fieth C., Olofsson J.I., Driessen S. et al. Dydrogesterone as an oral alternative to vaginal progesterone for IVF luteal phase support: A systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2020; 15 (11). Article ID e0241044. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241044
35. Molchanov O.L., Bezhenar V.F., Arakelyan B.V., Korshunov M.Yu., Kira E.F., Lebedeva Ya.A. On the mechanism of progesterone sensitization. Voprosy ginekologii, akusherstva i perinatologii [Problems of Gynaecology, Obstetrics and Perinatology]. 2019; 18(4): 109-114. DOI: 10.20953/1726-1678-2019-4-109-114 (in Russian)
36. Prevention of reproductive losses: strategy and tactics // Selected materials of the educational seminar “Innovations in obstetrics and gynecology from the standpoint of evidence-based medicine”. Newsletter / ed. by V.E. Radzinsky. Moscow: StatusPraesens, 2014. 24 p. (in Russian)
37. Carp H.J.A. Progestogens in luteal support. Horm Mol Biol Clin In-vestig. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/hmbci-2019-0067
38. Pharmacotherapy during pregnancy / ed. by E.V. Shikh. Moscow: GEOTAR-Media, 2019. 208 p. (in Russian)