ArticleJBRA assisted reproduction2018
Luteal phase ovarian stimulation for poor ovarian responders.
Article in JBRA assisted reproduction, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04447872 (Prospective, Randomized Trial Comparing Luteal Phase Ovarian Stimulation, and Luteal Estradiol Priming Protocol for Patients With Diminished Ovarian Reserve - The LUTEAL Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Prospective, Randomized Trial Comparing Luteal Phase Ovarian Stimulation, and Luteal Estradiol Priming Protocol for Patients With Diminished Ovarian Reserve - The LUTEAL Trial
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- ART outcomes following ovarian stimulation in the luteal phase:a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Pooled it
- How effective are the non-conventional ovarian stimulation protocols in ART? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2020Pooled it
- DuoStim - a reproducible strategy to obtain more oocytes and competent embryos in a short time-frame aimed at fertility preservation and IVF purposes. A systematic review.Upsala journal of medical sciences · 2020Pooled it
- What is the true place of a double stimulation and double oocyte retrieval in the same cycle for patients diagnosed with poor ovarian reserve? A systematic review including a meta-analytical approach.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2020Pooled it
- Double stimulation in the same menstrual cycle (DuoStim): a comparative evaluation of follicular and luteal phase response.Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association · 2026Article
- "Extended ovarian stimulation": a prolonged ovarian exposure to gonadotrophins leads to an increase in the oocyte yield-evidence from the DuoStim experience.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Review
- Non-Invasive Extracellular Vesicle Biomarkers in Endometriosis, Molecular Signatures Linking Pelvic Inflammation, Oocyte Quality, and IVF OutcomesCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2025Review
- Surfing follicular waves in ovarian stimulation: is there a role for LH in DuoStim protocols? A narrative review and SWOT analysis.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2025Review
- Comparison of luteal phase stimulation with follicular phase stimulation in poor ovarian response: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2024Article
- Investigating Ovulation Induction Outcomes in Patients with Decreased Ovarian Reserve Treated with Double Stimulation during The Follicular and Luteal Phases Compared to The Conventional Antagonist Cycle: A Randomized Clinical Trial.International journal of fertility & sterility · 2024Article
- Clinical Application of Double Ovulation Stimulation in Patients with Diminished Ovarian Reserve and Asynchronous Follicular Development Undergoing Assisted Reproduction Technology.Current medical science · 2023Article
- Oocyte Quality and Blastocyst Formation Rate with Dual Stimulation in Patients Belonging to POSEIDON Groups 3 and 4: A Retrospective Comparative Study.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2023Article
- Article
- Ongoing pregnancy and healthy live births following very short ovarian stimulation of incidentally observed big antral follicles in oligoamenorrheic patients with extremely decreased ovarian reserve.JBRA assisted reproduction · 2021Article
- Successful outcome of a pregnancy derived from premature ovulation in a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol: A case report.Clinical case reports · 2021Article
- Initial ovarian sensitivity index predicts embryo quality and pregnancy potential in the first days of controlled ovarian stimulation.Journal of ovarian research · 2020Observational
- Dual stimulation in unexpected poor responder POSEIDON classification group 1, sub-group 2a: A cross-sectional study.International journal of reproductive biomedicine · 2020Article
- Assessing the practice of LuPOR for poor responders: a prospective study evaluating follicular fluid cfDNA levels during natural IVF cycles.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2020Article
- ESHRE guideline: ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSIHuman reproduction open · 2020Article
- Luteal Phase Stimulation in the Same Cycle Is an Effective Strategy to Rescue POSEIDON Poor Responders with No Embryos after the First Follicular Stimulation.Journal of human reproductive sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the clinical outcomes of follicular versus luteal phase ovarian stimulation in women with poor ovarian response (Bologna criteria) undergoing IVF.
methodsThis retrospective study investigated 446 patients submitted to 507 cycles in three groups. First, the two larger cohorts were examined: 154 patients treated with luteal phase ovarian stimulation (Group Lu); and 231 patients administered follicular phase ovarian stimulation (Group Fo). Then the clinical outcomes of 61 patients submitted to double ovarian stimulation were analyzed. Clinical outcomes included number of retrieved oocytes, fertilization rate, cleavage rate, top-quality embryo rate, clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), and live birth rate (LBR).
resultsLonger stimulation, higher dosages of HMG, and higher MII oocyte rates were achieved in Group Lu (p<0.001). There were no significant differences in CPR and LBR between the two groups offered frozen-thawed embryo transfer (28.4% vs. 33.0%, p=0.484; 22.9% vs. 25.5%, p=0.666). In the double ovarian stimulation group, the number of oocytes retrieved in the luteal phase stimulation protocol was higher (p=0.035), although luteal phase stimulation yielded a lower rate of MII oocytes (p=0.031). CPR and LBR were not statistically different (13.8% vs. 21.4%, p=0.525; 10.3% vs. 14.3%, p=0.706).
conclusionLuteal phase ovarian stimulation may be a promising protocol to treat women with POR, particularly for patients unable to yield enough viable embryos through follicular phase ovarian stimulation or other protocols.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.