Objective: To assess intra-uterine LIF levels by uterine flushing at the time of egg retrieval. To confirm that the procedure had no detrimental effect on pregnancy rates. Design: Prospective study. A matched control group without flushing was used for the first 100 patients. Materials/Methods: Uterine flushings were performed in a total of 148 infertile patients undergoing IVF-ET. The first 100 patients in the study group were compared with a controlled group of 100 patients without flushing matched for age, number of attempts, day-3 FSH and type of procedure (classical IVF or ICSI). Uterine flushing were performed at the time of egg retrieval. The main outcome measures were: IVF-ET results, pregnancy rates, intra-uterine LIF levels. Results: The pregnancy rates were not different in the group of patients with (27%) or without uterine flushing (28%). In 18 cases (12%), the flushing could not be used for technical reasons (small volume, debris). For 60 patients (46%), we were able to detect LIF in the liquid collected after exposure to the uterine cavity. In the group where LIF was detected, the range of detection was 20 to 260 pg/ml (mean = 63.7 SD= 54.8 pg/ml). The pregnancy rates in the LIF detectable and undetectable group were 28.3% and 27.1% respectively (NS). The mean levels of LIF were mean=30.1 SD= 49.3 and mean=28.6 SD=51.2 in the pregnant and not pregnant patients respectively and these results are not statistically different. Conclusions: The flushing procedure at the time of egg retrieval did not adversely affect the pregnancy rates. We report for the first time that LIF could be detected in some patients (46%) at the time of egg retrieval. No correlation were observed towards better pregnancy rates in patients with detectable LIF in the uterine flushing. The mean level of LIF was not different in the pregnant and not pregnant women. The measurements of other cytokines levels is under progress. Access to the endo-luminal secretion of the endometrium during IVF-ET, open a new research area in human implantation. Supported by: None.