Recombinant follicular stimulating hormone plus recombinant luteinizing hormone versus human menopausal gonadotropins- does the source of LH bioactivity affect ovarian stimulation outcome?

Objective Luteinizing hormone (LH) and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) activate distinct intracellular signaling cascades. However, due to their similar structure and common receptor, they are used interchangeably during ovarian stimulation (OS). This study aims to assess if the source of LH used during OS affects IVF outcome. Patients and methods This was a cross sectional study of patients who underwent two consecutive IVF cycles, one included recombinant follicular stimulating hormone (FSH) plus recombinant LH [rFSH+rLH, (Pergoveris)] and the other included urinary hCG [highly purified hMG (HP-hMG), (Menopur)]. The OS protocol, except of the LH preparation, was identical in the two IVF cycles. Results The rate of mature oocytes was not different between the treatment cycles (0.9 in the rFSH+rLH vs 0.8 in the HP-hMG, p = 0.07). Nonetheless, the mean number of mature oocytes retrieved in the rFSH+rLH treatment cycles was higher compared to the HP-hMG treatment cycles (10 +/- 5.8 vs 8.3 +/- 4.6, respectively, P = 0.01). Likewise, the mean number of fertilized oocytes was higher in the rFSH+rLH cycles compared with the HP-hMG cycles (8.5 +/- 5.9 vs 6.4 +/- 3.6, respectively, p = 0.05). There was no difference between the treatment cycles regarding the number of top-quality embryos, the ratio of top-quality embryos per number of oocytes retrieved or fertilized oocytes or the pregnancy rate. Conclusion The differences in treatment outcome, derived by different LH preparations reflect the distinct physiological role of these molecules. Our findings may assist in tailoring a specific gonadotropin regimen when assembling an OS protocol.

Automated summary

This study compared the effects of different sources of LH on treatment outcomes in IVF, revealing differences in the number of mature oocytes and fertilized oocytes between different LH preparations. However, there were no significant differences in other indicators and pregnancy rates between the treatment cycles.