ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Impact of endogenous LH and LH supplementation on clinical outcome following a long GnRH agonist protocol in younger and older patients.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The optimal luteinizing hormone (LH) concentration on the day of hCG trigger during long-protocol IVF/ICSI remains uncertain. Although some studies associate profound LH suppression with impaired reproductive outcomes, others report no adverse effects. Importantly, most existing evidence does not consider maternal age as a potential effect modifier, despite its well established role in ovarian response and oocyte competence. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 9,979 IVF/ICSI cycles performed between 2009 and 2017, comprising 8,786 cycles in women younger than 38 years and 1,193 cycles in women aged 38 years or older. First, cycles were stratified into five groups according to serum LH concentration on the day of hCG trigger: <0.5, 0.5 to <1.0, 1.0 to <2.0, 2.0 to <5.0, and ≥5.0 IU/L, to evaluate associations with clinical outcomes. Second, among cycles with LH ≤1.0 IU/L on stimulation day 7, when r-hLH supplementation was considered according to institutional protocol, we compared outcomes between those who received r-hLH and those who did not, adjusting for age, antral follicle count, BMI and basal FSH. The primary outcomes were good-quality embryo rate, clinical pregnancy rate, and live birth rate. Results: In young patients (<38 years), LH levels on the hCG trigger day were not associated with oocyte yield, embryo quality, clinical pregnancy, or live birth rates, and r-hLH supplementation conferred no benefit. In older patients (≥38 years), LH <0.5 IU/L was associated with a lower good-quality embryo rate and greater gonadotropin consumption with prolonged stimulation, reflecting deeper pituitary suppression; however, it was not linked to differences in live birth rates, and r-hLH supplementation was not associated with a statistically significant improvement in good-quality embryo rate after multivariable adjustment. Conclusions: In women <38 years, profound LH suppression does not impair IVF outcomes and r-hLH is unnecessary. In those ≥38 years, low LH correlates with poorer embryo quality, but r-hLH supplementation shows no significant benefit after adjustment. Routine r-hLH add-back based solely on low LH levels is not supported.
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.