To investigate the role of exogenous LH in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for assisted reproductive technologies.Prospective randomized study.SISMER fertility unit.Women showing a hyporesponsiveness to FSH under GnRH agonist down-regulation were randomized into three groups: group A (n = 54) received an increased dosage of FSH; group B (n = 54) was administered recombinant LH in addition to the increased dose of FSH; group C (n = 22) was given additional FSH and LH using hMG as a combined drug. Fifty-four age-matched women with no need to increase the FSH dose were included as a control group (D).None.Implantation and live birth rate per started cycles.In group B, the pregnancy and implantation rates were statistically higher when compared with groups A and C and did not differ from the control group for normal response. The live birth rate was similar in groups B and D but was half as high in groups A and C.Hyporesponsiveness to FSH could be related to iatrogenic LH deficiency that, in turn, could affect oocyte competence. Addition of a small amount of recombinant LH is able to rescue oocyte competence to produce viable embryos.

The objective of this meta-analysis is to determine the beneficial effect of recombinant-luteinizing Hormone (r-LH) addition in women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol and whether an optimal time of Recombinant-Luteinizing Hormone (r-LH) supplementation exist during the controlled of stimulation (COS). The primary outcomes are clinical Pregnancy rate and the number of oocytes retrieved. Secondary outcomes are the number of metaphase II oocytes, miscarriage rate and live birth rate. Results show that supplementation of LH generated a greater number of oocytes retrieved than patients who did not receive LH supplementation, but it did not help with other pregnancy outcomes. Furthermore, the result of the subgroup analysis revealed no significant difference in the outcomes with different LH addition times.Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

To explore serum endocrine dynamics, specifically LH levels, following rLH supplementation to rFSH following GnRH-antagonist treatment in the advance reproductive age.Women were prospectively and similarly treated employing rFSH and the flexible GnRH-antagonist protocol, while rLH was supplemented only to the study group. Serum FSH, LH, E and P were evaluated throughout the follicular phase. Three strategies were a priori planned to examine endocrine dynamics among women enrolled.While serum LH drop were similar before GnRH-antagonist stimulation, it dropped more times in the control group compared to the study group. Among women receiving rFSH only, serum LH levels dropped ≤2, ≤1 and ≤0.5 mIU/mL in 71.4, 46.4, and 28.6% of cases, while this occurred only in 38.7% (P = 0.01), 6.5% (P = 0.0004) and 3.2% (P = 0.007) of women receiving combined rFSH and rLH treatment, respectively. The same trend was found when serum LH dropped in at least two occasions following the GnRH-antagonist administration. Conversely, serum LH diagrams throughout the follicular phase did not differ between the two groups. Furthermore, individual area under the curve values of LH, E and P was similar between the two groups following GnRH-antagonist initiation.Different strategies to explore LH dynamics following the GnRH-antagonist administration have resulted in diverse results, implying the need for a consensus definition of LH threshold for adequate folliculogenesis and steroidogenesis. Such action would pave the way for understanding which groups of patients may benefit from rLH supplementation.

Unlike poor ovarian response, despite being predicted to be normal responders based on their ovarian reserve markers, many patients respond suboptimally to ovarian stimulation. Although we can improve the number of retrieved oocytes by increasing the recombinant FSH dose and adding LH, the effect of suboptimal ovarian response on cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) and offspring safety is unclear. This study focuses on the unexpected suboptimal response during ovulation induction, and its causes and outcomes are analysed for the first time with a large amount of data used to compare the cumulative pregnancy rate (CPR), CLBR and offspring safety of patients with one complete ART cycle with all embryos used. Our analysis included 5218 patients treated with the GnRH agonist long protocol for their first IVF–embryo transfer (ET) cycles. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether the ovarian response was suboptimal. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized for sampling at up to 1:1 nearest-neighbour matching with caliper 0.05 to balance the baseline and improve comparability between the groups. Results showed that age, BMI and basal FSH were independent risk factors for slow response; the initial dosage of Gn, FSH on the first day of Gn, and LH on the first day of Gn were independent protective factors for suboptimal response. Suboptimal responders were also more likely to have irregular menses. Regarding the clinical pregnancy rate of the fresh IVF/ICSI-ET cycles, the adjusted results of the two groups were not significantly different. There was no difference in the CPR, CLBR, or offspring safety-related data, such as gestational age, preterm delivery rate, birthweight, birth-height and Apgar Scores between the two groups after PSM. Age-related changes in the number of oocytes retrieved from women aged 20–40 years old between the two groups were different, indicating that suboptimal response in elderly patients suggests a decline in ovarian reserve. Although we can now improve the outcomes of suboptimal responders, it increases the cost to the patients and the time to live birth, which requires further attention.

Studies on the role of LH supplementation in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technique use different sources of LH bioactivity-containing preparations, daily doses and modes of administration. This review aims to critically present the available evidence comparing the effect of the two commercially available LH preparations (human menopausal gonadotrophin [HMG] and recombinant FSH + recombinant LH) with different sources of intrinsic LH bioactivity (HCG versus LH, respectively) on ovarian stimulation characteristics and IVF cycle outcomes. A literature review was conducted for all relevant articles reporting on IVF and intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment outcome after ovarian stimulation using HMG or recombinant FSH plus recombinant LH. The available studies are mostly observational, using different daily doses and modes of administration. No statistically significant differences were observed in ovarian stimulation variables and clinical pregnancy and live birth rates when HMG was compared with recombinant FSH + recombinant LH. Moreover, combined analysis of all the available prospective and retrospective studies produced no firm conclusions in favour of either source of LH bioactivity. Further large randomized controlled studies are needed to investigate the effect of the LH source on IVF outcome and to identify patients who are most likely to benefit from the addition of LH bioactivity supplementation.Copyright © 2019 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

To systematically review the efficacy of a combination of recombinant follicle‐stimulating hormone (rFSH) and recombinant luteinizing hormone (rLH) protocol versus human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) protocol in controlled ovarian stimulation (COS).