ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Med.
Sec. Obstetrics and Gynecology
Luteal-Phase Stimulation Does Not Compromise Embryo Euploidy or Live Birth Outcomes Compared to Follicular-Phase Stimulation
Boyuan Chen 1
Meiling Zhang 1,2
Min Wang 1,2
Yong Wang 1,2
XiaoJun Chen 1,2
Li Wang 1,2
Wen Li 1,2
Dandan Wu 1,2
1. International Peace Maternity and Child Health Hospital, Shanghai, China
2. Shanghai Key Laboratory of Embryo Original Diseases, Shanghai, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Abstract
Background: Aneuploidy is a major cause of implantation failure and miscarriage in assisted reproductive technology. This study aimed to evaluate the embryo euploidy rate and live birth rate associated with the luteal-phase stimulation (LPS) protocol in in vitro fertilization (IVF), in comparison to the follicular-phase stimulation (FPS) protocol. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at a university-affiliated fertility center, including 667 preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) cycles performed between January 2020 and June 2023. After 1:1 propensity score matching, 106 cycles from each group (LPS and FPS) were analyzed. Baseline characteristics, ovarian stimulation parameters, euploidy rate, and subsequent reproductive outcomes were compared. Results: After matching, baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. The LPS group required a longer duration of gonadotropin stimulation (median 10.5 vs. 9 days, P < 0.001) and yielded fewer retrieved oocytes (median 6 vs. 9, P < 0.05) than the FPS group. On hCG day, Patients in the LPS group had significantly higher progesterone levels than those in the FPS group (median 6.1 vs. 3.1, P < 0.001). However, the euploidy rate did not differ significantly (33.9% vs. 30.8%, P > 0.05). Subgroup analyses stratified by age (<38 and ≥38 years) revealed consistent results. Likewise, clinical pregnancy rate (55.9% vs. 64.1%, P > 0.05), live birth rate (41.2% vs. 46.2%, P > 0.05), and the pregnancy loss rate (14.7% vs. 17.9%, P > 0.05) after the first embryo transfer were comparable. Conclusion: The LPS protocol demonstrated similar embryo euploidy and live birth rates to the FPS protocol, suggesting that LPS does not compromise chromosomal competence or reproductive outcomes. Given its scheduling flexibility, LPS may represent a clinically feasible and patient-friendly option in ART.
Summary
Keywords
Assisted Reproductive Technology, Controlled ovarian stimulation, Euploidy, Luteal-phase stimulation, preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A)
Received
10 October 2025
Accepted
26 January 2026
Copyright
© 2026 Chen, Zhang, Wang, Wang, Chen, Wang, Li and Wu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Wen Li; Dandan Wu
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.