Dear Editor,

We have read the paper published by Kumbak et al. [1] with great interest. The clinical data reported by the authors support the proposed theoretical mechanism by which luteal phase endometrial injury-induced inflammation improves uterine receptivity, implantation and pregnancy outcome in the subsequent ET cycle. However, these results contradict others’ published as systematic reviews and meta-analyses [2, 3]. It is expected that a suggested favourable influence of luteal phase local endometrial injury would not be sustained and could be lessened by shedding of the affected target endometrium in the subsequent menses before ET.