An integrated luteal progesterone (ILPL) was calculated on the basis of a luteal progesterone (P) level with the assumption that the daily plasma P level in the luteal phase closely approximates a sine curve. The midluteal P-amplitude (K) was also obtained mathematically. Daily luteal P levels from five normal ovulatory cycles were assessed for the biologic variation of ILPL and K, then compiled to construct a normogram of the ILP during the luteal phase. The coefficient of variation of K and total ILPL in each cycle ranged from 9.7% to 24.3% and 3.5% to 13.2%, respectively. Fifty-two infertility patients were evaluated for their luteal function by the luteal P and estradiol (E2) level, K, ILPL, endometrial biopsy (EBX)-lag-day, as well as the lengths of follicular phase, luteal phase (L#), and cycle. Thirty-nine patients had EBX-lag day less than or equal to 2 days and were designated as infertile-normal (INF-NL) luteal phase, while the remaining 13 patients who had EBX-lag day greater than 2 days were considered as luteal phase defect (LPD). Significant (P less than 0.05) differences were observed between INF-NL and LPD in: luteal length (13.2 +/- 0.31 versus 11.0 +/- 0.58 days, respectively), and total ILPL (170 +/- 8.3 versus 113 +/- 8.5 ng/ml-day, respectively). No differences were seen in luteal P, E2 and K levels, nor in follicular and cycle length. Significant (P less than 0.05) correlations were observed between total ILPL and luteal P, E2, L#, and K; while a negative correlation was noted between follicular and luteal length.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
PMID 3678513 3678513 DOI 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)59587-9 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)59587-9
Cite this article
Wu, C. H., & Minassian, S. S. (1987). The integrated luteal progesterone: an assessment of luteal function. Fertility and sterility, 48(6), 937-940. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(16)59587-9
Wu CH, Minassian SS. The integrated luteal progesterone: an assessment of luteal function. Fertil Steril. 1987;48(6):937-940. doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(16)59587-9
Wu, C. H., and S. S. Minassian. "The integrated luteal progesterone: an assessment of luteal function." Fertility and sterility, vol. 48, no. 6, 1987, pp. 937-940.
Luteal phase deficiency is an ovulatory dysfunction problem that is subtle but real. It may be the most common ovulatory problem in women. Luteal phase deficiency has been clearly demonstrated in the research setting (1) in spontaneous cycles, (2) when follicular maturation has been impeded, and (3) when luteotrophic influences have been suppressed. The diagnosis of LPD in the clinical setting remains problematic and controversial primarily because there is no practical diagnostic method that has been validated. This article has reviewed the methods that have been used to diagnose LPD. BBT charts are insensitive; these charts reliably diagnose LPD only when there are persistent short luteal phases. There is disagreement whether ovarian follicular size, as determined by ultrasonography, is decreased in LPD; however, ultrasonographic diagnosis of LPD would require daily scans through ovulation, which makes this approach impractical. Mild hyperprolactinemia is a probable cause of LPD in a minority of patients; a physician should obtain a PRL level in LPD women with the realization that there is considerable sampling variability. Determination of serum gonadotropin levels (LH or FSH or both) is not practical for the clinical diagnosis of LPD. Random serum P levels, whether single or multiple, are not helpful in the diagnosis of LPD in individual patients. The secretory pattern of P results in such wide confidence limits that P samples from individuals cannot be compared to normal in a useful manner. Most of the controversy about the diagnosis of LPD has centered around the use of individual serum P levels. The timed endometrial biopsy relies on the endometrium as a bioassay of P over time. The endometrial biopsy has not been carefully validated in terms of its sensitivity or accuracy for the diagnosis of LPD. However, it remains the best current method for the diagnosis of LPD when the standard guidelines for its use are followed. As opposed to the other tests for LPD, awareness of the usefulness of the biopsy has increased as we have learned more about CL physiology. No current research method for the diagnosis of LPD appears to be a practical method that could be applied in the clinical setting. Specific secretory proteins from the endometrium and methods to measure hormone secretion that circumvent the secretory pattern hold promise for improved methods to diagnose LPD in the future.
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and Practice Committee of the Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, 2026·Fertility and sterility
Luteal phase deficiency (LPD) is a clinical diagnosis associated with abnormal luteal phase length of ≤10 days. Potential etiologies of LPD include inadequate progesterone duration, inadequate progesterone levels, or endometrial progesterone resistance. Luteal phase deficiency has been described in association with medical conditions, but also in fertile, normally menstruating women. Although progesterone is important for the process of implantation and early embryonic development, LPD has not been proven to be an independent entity causing infertility or recurrent pregnancy loss. Controversy exists regarding the multiple proposed measures for diagnosing LPD, and assuming it can be diagnosed accurately, whether treatment improves outcomes. This document replaces the document of the same name, last published in 2021 (Fertil Steril 2021;115(6):1416-23).
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, 2026·Fertility and Sterility
Current strategies for the assessment and treatment of recurrent pregnancy loss are discussed. This replaces the previous document, titled, "Evaluation and treatment a committee opinion," last published in 2012.
This narrative review examines the evidence for medical optimization of inflammatory conditions, vitamin deficiencies, endocrine disorders, immune dysregulation, oligo-ovulation, and luteal phase factors to improve fertility outcomes in women attempting to conceive through natural or timed intercourse. Overall, there is a paucity of data with respect to these categories among patients pursuing timed intercourse, precluding our ability to draw strong recommendations. However, there is strong evidence supporting treatment of endocrine disorders, specifically overt thyroid dysfunction and hyperprolactinemia, as well as oligo-ovulation. Conversely, treatment of subclinical hypothyroidism is not recommended. The current data are insufficient to support empiric use of antiinflammatory medications, corticosteroids, thyroid hormones, or vitamins or supplements to improve chances of pregnancy in a general infertility population.