Effect Of Luteal Phase Support Research Articles

Use of hCG for luteal support in natural frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer cycles: a cohort study.

In the realm of natural frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles, the application of luteal phase support (LPS) is a prevalent practice, primarily due to its beneficial impact on reproductive outcomes. Among the various LPS medications, human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) is one that exerts its function on both the corpus luteum and the endometrium. To evaluate the effect of hCG administration as LPS on reproductive outcomes in natural FET cycles. This study was a retrospective cohort analysis conducted at a tertiary care hospital. It included women who underwent natural FET treatment from January 2018 to December 2022. Participants were divided into the hCG LPS group and the non-hCG LPS group on the basis of whether they used hCG as LPS after blastocyst transfer. The primary outcome was the clinical pregnancy and live birth rates. The secondary outcomes included the early miscarriage rate (before 12th gestational week) and total miscarriage rate. A total of 4762 women were included in the analysis, and 1910 received hCG LPS and 2852 received no hCG LPS (control group). In the general cohort, the clinical pregnancy and live birth rates in the hCG LPS group were significantly lower than those in the control group (63.82% vs 66.41%, aOR 0.872, 95% CI 0.765-0.996, P=0.046; 53.98% vs 57.15%, aOR 0.873, 95% CI 0.766-0.991, P=0.035, respectively). The early miscarriage and total miscarriage rates were similar between the two groups. In a subgroup analysis, in women who received an hCG trigger, there was no significant difference in the clinical pregnancy rate or live birth rate between the two groups. However, in women who ovulated spontaneously, the clinical pregnancy and live birth rates in the hCG LPS group were significantly lower than those in the control group (60.99% vs 67.21%, aOR 0.786, 95% CI 0.652-0.946, P=0.011; 50.56% vs 57.63%, aOR 0.743, 95% CI 0.619-0.878, P=0.001, respectively). Among women undergoing natural cycle frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer, hCG LPS is associated with lower clinical pregnancy and live birth rates. Additionally, the adverse effect of hCG LPS is more pronounced in women who ovulate spontaneously.

Does luteal Phase Support with Vaginal Micronized Progesterone Effect on Pregnancy Rates in Intrauterine Insemination (IUI) Cycles in Two Infertility Center During Six-Year Follow-up?

Introduction: Husband artificial intrauterine insemination (IUI) is a standard method of assisted reproduction for patients with mild male infertility, anovulation, endometriosis, and unknown infertility. In this study, we evaluated the effect of luteal phase support on the success rate of IUI cycles with vaginal micronized progesterone compared to the control. Material and Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 94 infertile women referring to two infertility centers in Sari, Iran, from 2015 to 2021. In these women, Clomiphene citrate or Letrozole was used, follicular monitoring continued, and human Gonadotropin was added based on ultra-sonographic findings. Intramuscular HCG was added when one or two follicles were to 17 mm. IUI was done 36 hours later, and micronized vaginal progesterone 400mg once daily was added on the day after insemination (n=114). IUI outcomes were evaluated with a serum Beta-HCG test and vaginal ultrasound two and five weeks later. Pregnant women were followed up until the end of the pregnancy. Data were analyzed with SPSS25 and STATA14 software. Results: Progesterone consumption had no significant relationship with pregnancy rates but a significant correlation with the number of antral follicles. Pregnancy occurrence was significantly associated with patient satisfaction, FSH, and AMH levels but not correlated with the duration and kinds of infertility. Conclusion: Vaginal micronized progesterone as luteal phase support is not effective in increasing pregnancy occurrences in IUI cycles like IVF cycles, but patients’ satisfaction may be increased among women impregnated undergoing IUI and progesterone support.

Estrogen in Luteal Phase Support: Effects on IVF-ICSI Antagonist Protocol Pregnancy Results

Aim: This study aimed to investigate the effect of luteal phase support (LPS) with estradiol in addition to progesterone on pregnancy outcomes in patients who underwent ovulation induction with GnRH antagonist protocol in in vitro fertilization- intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF-ICSI).
 Materials and Methods: This retrospective study was carried out at reproductive medicine center of Necmettin Erbakan University Meram Medical Faculty. The study enrolled 128 patients undergoing ICSI on an antagonist protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Study group administered 7.8 mg transdermal estradiol (E2) daily in addition to progesterone for LPS (n=64). Control group administered only progesterone for LPS (n=64). All women received 200 mg progesterone 3x1 intravaginal daily and 50 mg progesterone intramuscular injection per two days for LPS. Blood samples were drawn 12 days after embryo transfer for β-hCG. If the result is negative, treatment was discontinued, if positive, estradiol was discontinued and progesterone support was continued until the 10th week of gestation. Pregnancy outcomes were the main endpoint.
 Results: There was no difference between groups in terms of biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, abortus and ongoing pregnancy rates.
 Conclusion: In our study, the use of estrogen for luteal phase support in GnRH antagonist protocol did not show any difference on pregnancy outcomes.

SINGLE DOSE TRIPTORELIN 0 .1 MG AS A LUTEAL PHASE SUPPORT IN ANTAGONIST INTRACYTOPLASMIC SPERM INJECTION (ICSI) CYCLES

To compare the effect of luteal phase support using progesterone and triptorelin versus progesterone alone on the reproductive outcomes of antagonist ICSI cycles.

The efficacy and safety of luteal phase support with progesterone following ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to update the current evidence for the efficacy and safety of progesterone luteal phase support (LPS) following ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination treatment (OS-IUI) for unexplained or mild male infertility. Four additional studies were identified compared to the previous review in 2017. Twelve RCTs (2631 patients, 3262 cycles) met full inclusion criteria. Results from quantitative synthesis suggest that progesterone LPS after OS-IUI leads to higher live birth (RR 1.38, 95%CI [1.09, 1.74]; 7 RCTs, n=1748) and clinical pregnancy rates (RR 1.38, 95% CI [1.21, 1.59]; 11 RCTs, n=2163) than no LPS or placebo. This effect is specifically present in protocols using gonadotropins for OS-IUI (RR 1.41, 95%CI [1.17, 1.71]; 7 RCTs, n=1114), and unclear in protocols involving clomiphene citrate (RR 1.01, 95% CI [0.05, 18.94]; 2 RCTs, n=138). We found no effect of progesterone LPS on multiple pregnancy or miscarriage rates. No correlation between drug-dosage or duration of treatment and effect size was seen. Though our results suggest both benefit and safety of progesterone LPS in OS-IUI, evidence is of low to moderate quality and additional well-powered trials are still mandatory to confirm our findings and justify implementation in daily practice.Systematic Review Registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=292325, identifier CRD42021292325.

Luteal phase support for women trying to conceive by intrauterine insemination or sexual intercourse.

Luteal phase support for women trying to conceive by intrauterine insemination or sexual intercourse.

Dydrogesterone as an oral alternative to vaginal progesterone for IVF luteal phase support: A systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the evidence on the efficacy and safety of oral dydrogesterone versus micronized vaginal progesterone (MVP) for luteal phase support. Embase and MEDLINE were searched for studies that evaluated the effect of luteal phase support with daily administration of oral dydrogesterone (20 to 40 mg) versus MVP capsules (600 to 800 mg) or gel (90 mg) on pregnancy or live birth rates in women undergoing fresh-cycle IVF (protocol registered at PROSPERO [CRD42018105949]). Individual participant data (IPD) were extracted for the primary analysis where available and aggregate data were extracted for the secondary analysis. Nine studies were eligible for inclusion; two studies had suitable IPD (full analysis sample: n = 1957). In the meta-analysis of IPD, oral dydrogesterone was associated with a significantly higher chance of ongoing pregnancy at 12 weeks of gestation (odds ratio [OR], 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08 to 1.61; P = 0.0075) and live birth (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.57; P = 0.0214) compared to MVP. A meta-analysis combining IPD and aggregate data for all nine studies also demonstrated a statistically significant difference between oral dydrogesterone and MVP (pregnancy: OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.34; P = 0.04; live birth: OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.38; P = 0.02). Safety parameters were similar between the two groups. Collectively, this study indicates that a higher pregnancy rate and live birth rate may be obtained in women receiving oral dydrogesterone versus MVP for luteal phase support.

Does Luteal Phase Support Effect Pregnancy Rates in Intrauterine Insemination Cycles? A Prospective Randomised Controlled Study in a Tertiary Center

Intrauterine insemination (IUI) is a common treatment for couples with subfertility. Clomiphene citrate, gonadotropins, and letrozole are used for ovulation induction in IUI cycles. It has been well documented that luteal support with exogenous progesterone after in vitro fertilization is associated with higher pregnancy and live birth rates. Yet, luteal phase support in IUI cycles has become a debatable issue. The aim of this prospective controlled study was to assess the effect of luteal phase vaginal progesterone supplementation on β-hCG positivity and clinical pregnancy rates in women undergoing IUI. This prospective controlled randomised study was conducted at a tertiary infertility center. 87 patients with unexplained infertility or male subfertility who were treated with IUI using gonadotropins were enrolled. Patients in the study group (n = 44) received luteal phase vaginal progesterone supplementation. Patients in the control group (n = 43) did not receive any luteal phase support. There was no statistical difference between two groups in terms of β-hCG positivity and clinical pregnancy rates. Our findings do not show any beneficial effect of luteal phase support in IUI cycles stimulated with gonadotropins. Although luteal phase support in IUI cycles stimulated with gonadotropins is widely adopted, there is a lack of robust evidence.

Effect of luteal phase support with vaginal progesterone on pregnancy outcomes in natural frozen embryo transfer cycles: A meta-analysis.

Objective The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of vaginal progesterone for luteal phase support (LPS) on the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) in natural frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles via a meta-analysis.Methods We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies that met our selection criteria. Four online databases (PubMed, Embase, Medline, and the Cochrane Library) were searched between January 2017 and May 2017. Studies were selected according to predefined inclusion criteria and meta-analyzed using R software version 2.14.2. The main outcome measure was CPR.Results A total of 18 studies were reviewed and assessed for eligibility. One RCT (n=435) and three retrospective studies (n=3,033) met the selection criteria. In a meta-analysis of the selected studies, we found no significant difference in the CPR (odds ratio [OR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60–1.55) between the vaginal progesterone and control groups. An analysis of the two retrospective cohort studies that reported the live birth rate (LBR) following FET showed a significantly higher LBR in the vaginal progesterone group (OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.21–2.46). A subgroup meta-analysis of FET conducted 5 days after injection of human chorionic gonadotropin showed no significant differences between the two groups with regard to the CPR (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.90–1.55) or miscarriage rate (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.36–1.47).Conclusion The results of this meta-analysis of the currently available literature suggest that LPS with vaginal progesterone in natural FET cycles does not improve the CPR.

Preparation of the endometrium and timing of blastocyst transfer in modified natural cycle frozen-thawed embryo transfers (mNC-FET): a study protocol for a randomised controlled multicentre trial

IntroductionDespite the high number of frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles being conducted (190 000 cycles/year) in Europe, the timing of blastocyst transfer and the use of luteal phase progesterone support...

Impact du soutien de la phase lutéale par Human Chorionic Gonadotropine (hCG) dans les inséminations intra-utérines

ObjectivesThe objective of our study is to evaluate the impact of luteal phase support by hCG in intrauterine inseminations preceded by ovarian gonadotropin stimulation. MethodsA retrospective study was conducted at the CHU of Nice between March 1, 2016 and October 31, 2017. During this period, 300 intrauterine inseminations were included in data analysis. Ovarian stimulation was performed by gonadotropins and a GnRH antagonist was added, if needed. Following a modification of standard operative procedure in the department, patients who performed an intrauterine insemination from December 1, 2016 received luteal phase support with two injections of hCG 1500 IU, performed at three days of interval. Pregnancy and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome were the primary and secondary study endpoints, respectively. ResultsOut of 300 inseminations included in the analysis, 144 were performed with luteal phase support and 156 without support. No statistically significant difference in pregnancy rate was observed between these two groups (19.4% of pregnancy in the luteal phase support group and 15.38% in the group without luteal phase support, P=0.353). No ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome occurred over the course of the study. ConclusionOur study shows a slight improvement of pregnancy rate in the group subjected to luteal phase support by hCG after intrauterine insemination, but the benefit was not significant. A randomised prospective study based on a large cohort could help to assess the effect of luteal phase support during intrauterine inseminations.

Does multifollicular development and number of intermediate follicles contribute to the effect of luteal phase support with vaginal progesterone gel in intrauterine insemination cycles?

Luteal phase deficiency as a result of multifollicular development which produces supraphysiological progesterone and estradiol levels and benefit of luteal phase support have been proven in assisted reproductive technique (ART) treatment. But, there were some controversial results in intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles whether luteal phase support (LPS) with progesterone have an impact on pregnancy outcome. To assess the efficacy of vaginal progesterone gel in the gonadotropin-induced IUI cycles, this retrospective data analysis compared the luteal phase support and control group in terms of clinical pregnancy (CPR) and live birth rates (LBR). In subgroup analysis, multifollicular and monofollicular growth were analyzed separately. In total, after exclusion criteria, 380 IUI cycles were analyzed, cycles were grouped as LPS(+) and LPS(-) with 190 and 190 cycles, respectively. CPR and LBR were comparable between groups (11.6% vs. 10.5, p = .74 and 8.9% vs. 8.4%, p = .75 respectively). Although multifollicular growth demonstrated higher pregnancy outcomes than monofollicular growth, intermediate follicles (14–16 mm) had a positive impact on pregnancy outcome in monofollicular growth like multifollicular subgroup. We found no difference in CPR and LBR according to the luteal phase vaginal progesterone gel. Nevertheless, multifollicular cycles and also monofollicular growth cycles with two and more intermediate follicles may have benefit LPS in gonadotropin-induced IUI cycles.

The beneficial effect of luteal phase support on pregnancy rates in women with unexplained infertility

Purpose: To determine what percentage of women with regular menses and unexplained infertility seem to develop a mature dominant follicle (18-24 mm average diameter and serum estradiol >200 pg/mL). Also to determine the efficacy of empirical progesterone (P) supplementation in the luteal phase for those with unexplained infertility who seem to make mature follicles. Materials and Methods: Serial ultrasounds and serum estradiol levels performed in cases of infertility over one year duration in patients with patent fallopian tubes, normal semen parameters, and normal post-coital test. Vaginal P of different types were given in the luteal phase as exclusive treatment. Results: A viable fetus past the first trimester was found in 71.7% of the 80% of women developing a mature follicle who were treated with P. Conclusions: For the combined effect of efficacy of therapy, cost, convenience, and lack of side effects, supplemental use of P in the luteal phase should be considered as first line therapy for unexplained infertility rather than empirical use of “fertility” drugs and intrauterine insemination or even in vitro fertilization - embryo transfer (IVF-ET). Methods of determining who needs supplemental P are not presently available.

Does Progesterone Suppository to Luteal Phase Support Have Any Effect on Pregnancy Rates in the Intrauterine Insemination Cycles?

Objectives: Rate of infertility in overall is around 15-10%. Intra-Uterine Insemination (IUI) is one procedure for infertility treatment. Luteal phase support defect is a main factor in fail of pregnancy. Goal of this study was to evaluate the effect of luteal phase support with progesterone suppository in patients who undergoing IUI cycles.Materials & Methods: 100 infertile couples who were undergoing IUI treatment included in this study. Ovulation induction was done for all patients. When IUI was done, patients were distributed into two groups. The study group (n=50) received progesterone suppository and control group (n=50) doesn’t received any medicine. Then biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate and abortion rate compared between two study groups. Results: There were no differences in basic characteristics between two groups. Biochemical and clinical pregnancy were parallel in the study and control groups. There were no statistically significant increases in abortion rate between the study groups (P=0.49). Conclusion: Luteal phase support by progesterone suppository does not improve the pregnancy rate of stimulated IUI cycles.

The Effect of Luteal-Phase Support with Triptrolin Administration on Implantation and Clinical Pregnancy Rate in Assisted Reproductive Technology

Background: Luteal phase support with GnRH agonist administration has been shown to be effective in improving the outcome of assisted reproductive technology. The goal of this study was to evaluate the effect of single dose Triptrolin (a GnRH agonist) on the probability of the clinical pregnancy rate following embryo transfer (ET) in assisted reproductive techniques (ART). Methods: In this double blinded randomized clinical trial, 340 infertile women who were candidates for intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) were randomly assigned to receive GnRH agonist (Triptrolin) in the luteal phase or placebo. In the intervention group, 0.1 mg Triptrolin was injected subcutaneously, while the control group received normal saline. The clinical pregnancy and implantation rate were compared between the two groups using chi-2 and t-test. P-values less than 0.05 were considered significant. The registration number of this clinical trial is IRCT 2014030916912N1. Results: Administration of 0.1 mg Triptrolin on day 6 after oocyte pick up showed no superiority over placebo in implantation (16.9% - 14%, P = 0.40) and clinical pregnancy rates (32% - 29%, P = 0.66), but the rate of clinical pregnancy was higher in women who were below 27 years of age and those with PCO. Conclusion: Administration of Triptrolin was not superior to placebo for luteal phase support.

Frozen-thawed embryo transfers in natural cycles with spontaneous or induced ovulation: the search for the best protocol continues.

Is natural cycle frozen-thawed embryo transfer (NC-FET) associated with better clinical pregnancy rates (CPR) when compared to modified natural cycle frozen-thawed embryo transfer (mNC-FET)? NC-FET is associated with a higher CPR compared to mNC-FET. There is conflicting evidence regarding the impact of hCG triggering on clinical outcomes after frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET), and information on the effect of luteal phase support (LPS) is lacking. This retrospective study included all (n=2353) consecutive cycles with FET of vitrified cleavage and blastocyst stage embryos warmed between January 2010 and April 2015 in a tertiary centre. The FET cycles were grouped by type as follows: NC (n=501), NC + LPS (n=828) or mNC + LPS (n=1024). Artificial cycles were excluded from the analysis. We performed mixed-effect multilevel multivariable regression analysis to account for the clustering of FETs using embryos derived from the same patient and/or ovarian stimulation cycle. Adjustment for the following potential confounders was also performed: female age at oocyte retrieval, number of oocytes retrieved, fresh cycle pregnancy outcome, embryo transfer rank, number of embryos transferred, embryo stage and grade and endometrial thickness. Bonferroni adjustment for multiple comparisons was performed whenever indicated. The unadjusted CPR per cycle was significantly higher in the NC-FET group (46.9%) when compared with the mNC-FET + LPS groups (29.7%, P<0.001) but not the NC-FET + LPS group (39.9%, P=0.069). The lower clinical performance of mNC-FET + LPS remained significant even after adjusting for potential confounders [adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) compared to the NC-FET groups: 2.18 (1.64-2.90) and 1.67 (1.31-2.12) for the NC-FET and NC-FET + LPS groups, respectively]. A sensitivity analysis restricting the sample only to the first FET performed by the couple in our centre was also performed. The predicted CPR in this multivariable logistic regression model remained significantly higher in the NC-FET (53.9%) and NC-FET + LPS (44.9%) groups when compared to mNC-FET + LPS (34.2%, all Bonferroni-adjusted pairwise comparisons with P≤0.01). The interpretation of the findings of this study is limited by the retrospective nature of the analysis and the potential for unmeasured confounding. The use of mNC-FET, using hCG triggering or progesterone supplementation, should be reconsidered in light of the potential negative effect on pregnancy outcome. None. N/A.

The effect of luteal phase support on pregnancy rates in intrauterine insemination cycles following ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins- a randomized controlled trial

To investigate if luteal phase support with vaginal progesterone in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) using gonadotropins and intrauterine insemination (IUI) improves conception rates in couples with infertility.

Impact of luteal phase support with vaginal progesterone on the clinical pregnancy rate in intrauterine insemination cycles stimulated with gonadotropins: a randomized multicenter study

To evaluate the effect of luteal phase support (LPS) in intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles stimulated with gonadotropins. Randomized multicenter trial. Academic tertiary care centers and affiliated secondary care centers. Three hundred and ninety-three normo-ovulatory patients, <43years, with body mass index ≤30kg/m2, in their first IUI cycle, with at least one patent tube, a normal uterine cavity, and a male partner with total motile sperm count ≥5 million after capacitation. Gonadotropin stimulation, IUI, randomization to LPS using vaginal progesterone gel (n = 202) or no LPS (n = 191). Clinical pregnancy rate, live-birth rate, miscarriage rate, and duration of the luteal phase. The primary outcome, the clinical pregnancy rate, was not statistically different between the treatment group (16.8%) and the control group (11%) (relative risk [RR] 1.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-2.67). Similarly, the secondary outcome, the live-birth rate, was 14.9% in the treatment group and 9.4% in the control group (RR 1.60; 95% CI, 0.89-2.87). The mean duration of the luteal phase was about 2days longer in the treatment group (16.6 ± 2.2days) compared with the control group (14.6 ± 2.5days) (mean difference 2.07; 95% CI, 1.58-2.56). Although a trend toward a higher clinical pregnancy rate as well as live-birth rate was observed in the treatment group, the difference with the control group was not statistically significant. NCT01826747.

The effect of luteal-phase support with vaginal progesterone on pregnancy rates in gonadotropin and clomiphene citrate/intra-uterine insemination cycles in unexplained infertility: A prospective randomised study

The purpose of this study is to analyse the effect of luteal-phase support on pregnancy rates in gonadotropin + intra-uterine insemination (Gn/IUI) and clomiphene citrate (CC) +IUI (CC/IUI) cycles in patients with unexplained infertility. Equal numbers of patients were recruited in two treatment arms (CC/IUI and Gn/IUI) (n = 100, n = 100, respectively). In each group, 50 patients received vaginal progesterone for 14 days (Crinone 8% vaginal gel, 90 mg per day) for luteal-phase support from the day after IUI and continued until menstruation or the 10th week of gestation if pregnant. There were 29 clinical pregnancies among 200 patients. Pregnancy rates were 12% in CC/IUI cycles, 10% in luteal-phase-supported CC/IUI cycles 16% in Gn/IUI cycles and 20% in luteal-phase-supported Gn/IUI cycles. Although pregnancy rates were higher in Gn/IUI cycles compared to CC/IUI cycles, luteal-phase support did not significantly affect the pregnancy rates in both groups. This study implies that luteal-phase support with progesterone has no pronounced beneficial effect on pregnancy rates in either CC/IUI or Gn/IUI cycles in patients with unexplained infertility.

Luteal phase support after mild ovulation induction with intrauterine insemination: an on-going debate

Objective: To evaluate the effect of luteal phase support (LPS) using progesterone vaginal gel on pregnancy rate (PR) and live birth rate (LBR) during cycles in which controlled ovarian stimulation (COH) was performed using gonadotropins with intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles in patients with unexplained infertility and polycystic ovarian syndrome.Materials and methods: From 2010 to 2015, all IUI cycles in which COH was performed using gonadotropins were evaluated retrospectively. LPS was not used until July 2013, after which vaginal progesterone gel was applied in the luteal phase of IUI cycles. Both groups of patients were evaluated in terms of the effect of LPS on PR and LBR.Results: In total, 1578 IUI cycles were evaluated, of which 481 were LPS (+) and 1097 LPS (−). PR and LBR per cycle were 10.6% and 7.4%, respectively, in the LPS (+) group, and 11.6% and 7.7%, respectively, in the LPS (−) group (p = 0.31 and p = 0.25). PR and LBR per patient were 17% and 12%, respectively, in the LPS (+) group, and 17.4% and 12.3%, respectively, in the LPS (−) group (p = 0.48 and p = 0.82).Conclusions: We found no difference in PR and LBR per cycle and per patient according to the use of LPS in IUI cycles in which COH was performed using gonadotropins. Thus, routine use of LPS in gonadotropin-stimulated cycles requires further research involving larger numbers of patients.