Lawrenz, Barbara, Peralta, Sara, Kalafat, Erkan, Marques, Laura Marqueta, Melado, Laura, Elkhatib, Ibrahim, Del Gallego, Raquel, Ata, Baris, Fatemi, Human (2025) Similar outcomes, different timings: luteal vs. follicular stimulation in in vitro fertilization. Fertility and Sterility, 125 (2). pp. 298-307. ISSN 0015-0282. (doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.08.032) (The full text of this publication is not currently available from this repository. You may be able to access a copy if URLs are provided) (KAR id:112991)
| The full text of this publication is not currently available from this repository. You may be able to access a copy if URLs are provided. | |
| Contact us about this publication | |
| Official URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.08.032 |
|
Abstract
Objective
To compare the impact of luteal-phase ovarian stimulation on embryo count, embryo ploidy, and embryo quality with that of follicular-phase stimulation.
Design
Retrospective cohort study between March 2017 and November 2024.
Subjects
Women who underwent ovarian stimulation, commenced either in the follicular or the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle.
Exposure
Luteal-phase ovarian stimulation
Main Outcome Measures
Counts of euploid embryos and embryo quality.
Results
The initial cohort included 3,524 follicular-phase cycles and 552 luteal-phase cycles. After 2:1 propensity score matching on age, body mass index, antimüllerian hormone, antral follicle count, origin of semen, stimulation medication used, 1,058 follicular-phase cycles were matched to 550 luteal-phase cycles. Luteal-phase stimulations required a significantly longer duration (median 11.0 vs. 10 days) and higher total gonadotropin dose (median 4,050 IU vs. 3,300 IU). Median counts of cumulus-oocyte-complexes (COCs), mature (MII) and fertilized oocytes, total-, biopsied-, and euploid blastocysts did not differ significantly between groups before regression adjustment. Multivariable regression analyses on the matched cohort showed adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for MII count (luteal-phase vs. follicular-phase) of 1.04 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.00–1.09), for blastocyst count 1.05 (95% CI: 0.99–1.11), and for euploid blastocyst count 1.04 (95% CI: 0.94–1.14). Embryo quality distribution did not differ significantly between follicular-phase (N = 3,831: 8.4% top, 49.5% good, 22.1% fair, and 20.0% poor) and luteal-phase (N = 2,110: 9.4% top, 51.1% good, 20.9% fair, and 18.6% poor) groups.
A total of 147 women with a luteal-phase and follicular-phase cycle within one year underwent a paired analysis. Again, luteal-phase cycles required significantly longer stimulation (median 11 vs. 10 days) and higher gonadotropin doses (median 4,050 IU vs. 3,600 IU). No statistically significant differences were found in the median number of COCs, MIIs, fertilized oocytes, total-, biopsied-, or euploid blastocysts between the paired luteal-phase and follicular-phase cycles for these women.
Conclusion
Ovarian stimulation initiated in the luteal phase has no detrimental impact on ploidy number or embryo quality. The key advantage of luteal-phase stimulation is an extended duration for initiating ovarian stimulation, which can be useful for couples with time constraints.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| DOI/Identification number: | 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.08.032 |
| Subjects: | Q Science > QM Human anatomy |
| Institutional Unit: | Schools > School of Natural Sciences > Biosciences |
| Former Institutional Unit: |
There are no former institutional units.
|
| Funders: | University of Kent (https://ror.org/00xkeyj56) |
| SWORD Depositor: | JISC Publications Router |
| Depositing User: | JISC Publications Router |
| Date Deposited: | 21 Jul 2026 13:04 UTC |
| Last Modified: | 21 Jul 2026 13:04 UTC |
| Resource URI: | https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/112991 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes) |
- Export to:
- RefWorks
- EPrints3 XML
- BibTeX
- CSV
- Depositors only (login required):

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2841-5745
Altmetric
Altmetric