Effect of rLH Supplementation during Controlled Ovarian Stimulation for IVF: Evidence from a Retrospective Analysis of 1470 Poor/Suboptimal/Normal Responders Receiving Either rFSH plus rLH or rFSH Alone.
Bologna criteria
IVF outcome
POSEIDON classification
in vitro fertilization
live birth rate
poor responders
recombinant FSH
recombinant LH
suboptimal responders
Journal
Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 Mar 2022
13 Mar 2022
Historique:
received:
04
02
2022
revised:
07
03
2022
accepted:
11
03
2022
entrez:
25
3
2022
pubmed:
26
3
2022
medline:
26
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
We retrospectively studied a real-life population of 1470 women undergoing IVF, with poor/suboptimal/normal ovarian responsiveness to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS), comparing the cumulative live birth rate (cLBR) when COS was performed using rFSH alone or rFSH + rLH in a 2:1 ratio. Overall, we observed significantly higher cLBR in the rFSH alone group than in the rFSH + rLH group (29.3% vs. 22.2%, p < 0.01). However, considering only suboptimal/poor responders (n = 309), we observed comparable cLBR (15.6% vs. 15.2%, p = 0.95) despite the fact that patients receiving rFSH + rLH had significantly higher ages and worse ovarian reserve markers. The equivalent effectiveness of rFSH + rLH and rFSH alone was further confirmed after stratification according to the number of oocytes retrieved: despite basal characteristics were still in favor of rFSH alone group, the cLBR always resulted comparable. Even subdividing patients according to the POSEIDON classification, irrespective of differences in the baseline clinical characteristics in favor of FSH alone group, the cLBR resulted comparable in all subgroups. Despite the retrospective, real-life analysis, our data suggest that rLH supplementation in COS may represent a reasonable option for patients with predictable or unexpected poor/suboptimal ovarian responsiveness to FSH, those matching the Bologna criteria for poor responsiveness, and those included in the POSEIDON classification.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35329901
pii: jcm11061575
doi: 10.3390/jcm11061575
pmc: PMC8954443
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Hum Reprod Update. 2013 Jan-Feb;19(1):67-83
pubmed: 23103636
Hum Reprod. 2011 Jul;26(7):1616-24
pubmed: 21505041
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 May 24;5:CD005070
pubmed: 28537052
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020 May;37(5):1163-1170
pubmed: 32185595
Int J Oncol. 2004 May;24(5):1325-38
pubmed: 15067357
Hum Reprod. 2017 Mar 1;32(3):544-555
pubmed: 28137754
Reprod Biomed Online. 2017 Nov;35(5):616-623
pubmed: 28821386
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2021 Jun 21;19(1):91
pubmed: 34154604
Panminerva Med. 2019 Mar;61(1):24-29
pubmed: 30021418
Reprod Biomed Online. 2006 Feb;12(2):221-33
pubmed: 16478591
Reprod Biomed Online. 2003 Mar;6(2):244-56
pubmed: 12676010
Hum Reprod. 2003 Feb;18(2):314-22
pubmed: 12571167
Hum Reprod. 2010 Aug;25(8):2092-100
pubmed: 20539042
Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019 Nov 20;10:814
pubmed: 31824427
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2014 Nov 24;12:109
pubmed: 25420965
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2010 Sep;1205:5-11
pubmed: 20840246
Int J Mol Sci. 2020 Mar 19;21(6):
pubmed: 32204404
Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019 Jun 27;10:387
pubmed: 31316461
Fertil Steril. 2011 Mar 1;95(3):1031-6
pubmed: 21067717
Fertil Steril. 2018 Apr;109(4):644-664
pubmed: 29653717
Hum Reprod. 2007 Feb;22(2):548-57
pubmed: 17095516
Sci Rep. 2020 Jul 31;10(1):12907
pubmed: 32737326
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2009 Sep 22;7:101
pubmed: 19772632
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2019 Feb 6;17(1):18
pubmed: 30728019
Hum Reprod. 2011 Jun;26(6):1270-83
pubmed: 21502182
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019 Dec;300(6):1741-1750
pubmed: 31667611
Fertil Steril. 2012 May;97(5):1108-14.e1
pubmed: 22365075
Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2018 Jun 29;9:327
pubmed: 30008696
Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 1992 Apr;36(4):339-45
pubmed: 1424166
Hum Reprod. 2011 Jul;26(7):1768-74
pubmed: 21558332
Fertil Steril. 1993 May;59(5):1090-4
pubmed: 8486179
Reprod Biomed Online. 2015 Jun;30(6):593-601
pubmed: 25911599
Reprod Fertil Dev. 2013;25(3):511-22
pubmed: 23464498
Reprod Biomed Online. 2003 Jul-Aug;7(1):59-64
pubmed: 12930575
Reprod Biomed Online. 2007 Sep;15(3):326-37
pubmed: 17854533
Fertil Steril. 2003 Dec;80(6):1444-9
pubmed: 14667881
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2005 Jul;90(7):3847-53
pubmed: 15827095
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2015 Jul 25;13:77
pubmed: 26209525
Fertil Steril. 1999 Jan;71(1):174-81
pubmed: 9935138
Lancet. 1991 Jun 8;337(8754):1375-7
pubmed: 1674764
Fertil Steril. 2007 Mar;87(3):542-6
pubmed: 17126339
Fertil Steril. 1999 Mar;71(3):405-14
pubmed: 10065772
Hum Reprod Update. 2005 May-Jun;11(3):261-76
pubmed: 15831503
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2001 Jan;86(1):337-43
pubmed: 11232021