luteal function pregnancy outcome spontaneous abortion prevention, progesterone luteal phase support miscarriage prevention, luteal insufficiency preterm birth IUGR prevention, Siklosi luteal function pregnancy determinant, corpus luteum support preventing prematurity, luteal phase deficiency recurrent pregnancy loss treatment, progesterone supplementation intrauterine growth restriction prevention, early pregnancy luteal support outcomes, luteal phase defect spontaneous abortion premature delivery, hormonal support early pregnancy successful outcomes
Cite this article
Siklósi, G., Acs, N., Demendi, C., Börzsönyi, B., Gimes, G., Bakos, L., Olajos, F., & Marcsek, Z. (2001). Luteal function as the main determinant of pregnancy outcome: successful prevention of spontaneous abortion, prematurity and IUGR. Early Pregnancy, 5(1), 22-23.
Siklósi G, Acs N, Demendi C, Börzsönyi B, Gimes G, Bakos L, et al. Luteal function as the main determinant of pregnancy outcome: successful prevention of spontaneous abortion, prematurity and IUGR. Early Pregnancy (Cherry Hill). 2001;5(1):22-23.
Siklósi, G., et al. "Luteal function as the main determinant of pregnancy outcome: successful prevention of spontaneous abortion, prematurity and IUGR." Early Pregnancy, vol. 5, no. 1, 2001, pp. 22-23.
Kaider AS et al., 2001·Early Pregnancy (Cherry Hill)
The role of luteal phase estrogen in pregnancy outcome has been a matter of considerable debate. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of estrogen supplementation in gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa)/human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG)-stimulated cycles associated with low luteal estrogen concentration, a study was performed comparing the ongoing pregnancy rates in cycles with serum concentrations of estradiol (E2) <100 pg/ml 11 days post embryo transfer (p-ET), treated with luteal phase progesterone (P4) vs. E2 and P4 supplementation. Among 1106 serum samples studied, 951 were from women receiving GnRHa and follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) prior to oocyte retrieval and P4 (50 mg-100 mg IM daily) as luteal phase supplementation beginning day 11 after retrieval. The remaining 155 were from women receiving both E2 (2 mg-6 mg estrace orally each day) and P4 during the luteal phase. Significantly greater frequencies of preclinical losses were observed among women with human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) concentrations>5 mIU/ml and concurrent E2 concentrations <100 pg/ml compared with E2 >100 pg/ml (p<0.00001). Among the 128 women who had hCG concentrations >5 mIU/ml and E2 concentrations <100 pg/ml, 102 received P4 only during the luteal phase and 26 were treated with estrace 2 mg-6 mg daily, as well as P4 during the luteal phase. The frequency of preclinical pregnancy losses among the 102 women with hCG >5 mIU/ml and E2 <100 pg/ml who did not receive luteal E2 supplementation was 72%, compared with 50% who received luteal E2 supplementation (p=0.04) The increase in preclinical pregnancy loss rates among women not receiving luteal E2 resulted in a decrease in ongoing pregnancy rate (8%), compared to those receiving luteal E2 supplementation (31%) (p=0.002). Our results indicated that a subset of women losing pregnancies preclinically after GnRHa and FSH stimulation due to low luteal phase serum E2 level may benefit from luteal estrogen supplementation. More sensitive and specific markers are needed to identify prospectively women in this risk group.
Gleicher N et al., 2001·Early Pregnancy (Cherry Hill)
Innumerable studies have attempted to demonstrate that hormonal support of the luteal phase during ovulation induction cycles improves pregnancy rates. None has, however, so far been able to confirm the validity of such treatment conclusively, possibly because most studies only utilized progesterone substitution. Since luteal phase endometrium also requires estradiol support, this study attempted to investigate whether hormone substitution with progesterone and estradiol would be more successful in improving pregnancy rates. Amongst approximately 7500 consecutive ovulation induction cycles were identified prospectively which were characterized by a precipitous drop of luteal phase serum estradiol levels by more than 50% over a 48 hour period within 10 days from hCG administration. Those cycles were prospectively randomized to oral micronized estradiol substitution (Group I) or not (Group II), while both groups received routine progesterone substitution of the luteal phase. Cycles were then evaluated in regards to the occurrence of chemical, ectopic and clinical pregnancies. One hundred sixty-three Group I cycles resulted in 34 pregnancies (20.9%), which compared favorably to 21 pregnancies in 167 Group II patients (12.6%) (x2[1] = 4.06; p < 0.04). The advantage for Group I cycles (29/95 pregnancies, 31%) vs. Group II cycles (16/105, 15%) became even more pronounced when only women up to age 35 years were evaluated. Estradiol substitution maintained a significant advantage until age 38 (x2 [1] = 6.87; p < 0.009). While gravidity did not affect pregnancy success, estradiol substitution in Group I benefited nulliparous (23% pregnancy rate) over multiparous women (12% pregnancy rate) (x2 [2] = 6.86; p< 0.03). This association was, however, age-dependent. A combined estradiol and progesterone substitution of the luteal phase of ovulation induction cycles increases the overall pregnancy rate. Since estradiol substitution was initiated in this study only once a precipitous drop in serum estradiol levels had already taken place, an even larger improvement in pregnancy rates could conceivably be possible if earlier estradiol substitution of the luteal phase is initiated. A further expansion of investigations of similar protocols for routine ovulation induction and in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles may be indicated, especially in women below age 38 years and in nulliparous females.