Advertisement

Beurteilung und Therapie der Lutealphase

  • Barbara Sonntag
Living reference work entry
Part of the Springer Reference Medizin book series (SRM)

Zusammenfassung

Die Lutealphase ist die zweite Zyklushälfte und wird durch Umwandlung des dominanten Follikels zum Corpus luteum nach Freisetzung der Eizelle bei der Ovulation charakterisiert. Die Progesteronwirkung am Endometrium ermöglicht Eintritt und Erhalt einer Schwangerschaft. Eine unzureichende Progesteronsekretion oder -wirkung kennzeichnet eine Lutealphaseninsuffizienz. Dies ist als Folge einer vorausgegangenen Reifungsstörung des Follikels zu verstehen und – wann immer möglich – ursächlich zu behandeln. Aufgrund der fehlenden Validität von Progesteronmessung oder Endometriumbiopsie erfolgt die Diagnose klinisch anhand eines auffälligen Zyklusmusters mit verkürzter zweiter Zyklushälfte und/oder prämenstruellen Spottings. Nach jeder kontrollierten ovariellen Stimulation im Rahmen einer assistierten Reproduktion muss eine Lutealphasensubstitution erfolgen.

Literatur

  1. Andersen AN et al (2002) Progesterone supplementation during early gestations after IVF or ICSI has no effect on the delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 17(2):357–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersen CY et al (2016) Micro-dose hCG as luteal phase support without exogenous progesterone administration: mathematical modelling of the hCG concentration in circulation and initial clinical experience. J Assist Reprod Genet 33:1311–1318CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Beckers NG et al (2003) Nonsupplemented luteal phase characteristics after the administration of recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin, recombinant luteinizing hormone, or gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist to induce final oocyte maturation in in vitro fertilization patients after ovarian stimulation with recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone and GnRH antagonist cotreatment. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 88(9):4186–4192CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bishop CV, Hennebold JD, Stouffer RL (2009) The effects of luteinizing hormone ablation/replacement versus steroid ablation/replacement on gene expression in the primate corpus luteum. Mol Hum Reprod 15(3):181–193CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Branch DW, Gibson M, Silver RM (2010) Clinical practice. Recurrent miscarriage. N Engl J Med 363(18):1740–1747CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown JB (2011) Types of ovarian activity in women and their significance: the continuum (a reinterpretation of early findings). Hum Reprod Update 17(2):141–158CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Carmichael SL et al (2005) Maternal progestin intake and risk of hypospadias. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 159(10):957–962CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Coetsier T, Dhont M (1996) Complete and partial luteinized unruptured follicle syndrome after ovarian stimulation with clomiphene citrate/human menopausal gonadotrophin/human chorionic gonadotrophin. Hum Reprod 11(3):583–587CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Coomarasamy A et al (2015) A randomized trial of progesterone in women with recurrent miscarriages. N Engl J Med 373:2141–2148CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Coutifaris C et al (2004) Histological dating of timed endometrial biopsy tissue is not related to fertility status. Fertil Steril 82(5):1264–1272CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Crosignani PG, Rubin BL (2000) Optimal use of infertility diagnostic tests and treatments. The ESHRE Capri Workshop Group. Hum Reprod 15(3):723–732CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Csapo AI, Pulkkinen M (1978) Indispensability of the human corpus luteum in the maintenance of early pregnancy. Luteectomy evidence. Obstet Gynecol Surv 33(2):69–81CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis OK et al (1989) The incidence of luteal phase defect in normal, fertile women, determined by serial endometrial biopsies. Fertil Steril 51(4):582–586CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Daya S, Gunby J (2004) Luteal phase support in assisted reproduction cycles. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD004830Google Scholar
  15. De Souza MJ et al (2010) High prevalence of subtle and severe menstrual disturbances in exercising women: confirmation using daily hormone measures. Hum Reprod 25(2):491–503CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Devaseelan P, Fogarty PP, Regan L (2010) Human chorionic gonadotrophin for threatened miscarriage. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 5:CD007422Google Scholar
  17. Devoto L et al (2002) Control of human luteal steroidogenesis. Mol Cell Endocrinol 186(2):137–141CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Devoto L et al (2009) The human corpus luteum: life cycle and function in natural cycles. Fertil Steril 92(3):1067–1079CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Diaz-Gimeno P, Horcajadas JA, Martínez-Conejero JA et al (2011) A genomic diagnostic tool for human endometrial receptivity based on the transcriptomic signature. Fertil Steril 95:50–60CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Edwards RG, Steptoe PC, Purdy JM (1980) Establishing full-term human pregnancies using cleaving embryos grown in vitro. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 87(9):737–756CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Ellinwood WE, Norman RL, Spies HG (1984) Changing frequency of pulsatile luteinizing hormone and progesterone secretion during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle of rhesus monkeys. Biol Reprod 31(4):714–722CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Fan HY et al (2009) MAPK3/1 (ERK1/2) in ovarian granulosa cells are essential for female fertility. Science 324(5929):938–941CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Fatemi HM et al (2007) An update of luteal phase support in stimulated IVF cycles. Hum Reprod Update 13(6):581–590CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Fauser BC, Devroey P (2003) Reproductive biology and IVF: ovarian stimulation and luteal phase consequences. Trends Endocrinol Metab 14(5):236–242CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Haas DM, Ramsey PS (2013) Progestogen for preventing miscarriage. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10:CD003511Google Scholar
  26. Jarvela IY, Ruokonen A, Tekay A (2008) Effect of rising hCG levels on the human corpus luteum during early pregnancy. Hum Reprod 23(12):2775–2781CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Jones GE (1949) Some newer aspects of the management of infertility. JAMA 141(16):1123–1129, illustCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jordan J et al (1994) Luteal phase defect: the sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic methods in common clinical use. Fertil Steril 62(1):54–62CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Kolibianakis EM et al (2008) Estrogen addition to progesterone for luteal phase support in cycles stimulated with GnRH analogues and gonadotrophins for IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod 23(6):1346–1354CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Krieg J, Hornung D, Kiesel L (2012) Regulation der Fortpflanzungsfunktion, Kap. 8. In: Kaufmann M, Costa C, Scharl A (Hrsg) Die Gynäkologie. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Kyrou D et al (2011) Does cessation of progesterone supplementation during early pregnancy in patients treated with recFSH/GnRH antagonist affect ongoing pregnancy rates? A randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 26(5):1020–1024CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Licciardi FL et al (1999) Oral versus intramuscular progesterone for in vitro fertilization: a prospective randomized study. Fertil Steril 71(4):614–618CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Linden M van der, Buckingham K, Farquhar C, Kremer JA, Metwally M (2015). Luteal phase support for assisted reproduction cycles. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 7:CD009154Google Scholar
  34. Lockwood G, Griesinger G, Cometti B (2014) Subcutaneous progesterone versus vaginal progesterone gel for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization: a noninferiority randomized controlled study. Fertil Steril 101:112–119CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Ludwig M (2010) Gynäkologische Endokrinologie. Optimist-Fachbuchverlag, HamburgGoogle Scholar
  36. Ludwig M, Sonntag B (2010) LUF-Syndrom: häufig, selten oder nicht existent? Gynäkol Endokrinol 8(2):112–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Malcolm CE, Cumming DC (2003) Does anovulation exist in eumenorrheic women? Obstet Gynecol 102(2):317–318PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Murray MJ et al (2004) A critical analysis of the accuracy, reproducibility, and clinical utility of histologic endometrial dating in fertile women. Fertil Steril 81(5):1333–1343CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Niswender GD et al (2000) Mechanisms controlling the function and life span of the corpus luteum. Physiol Rev 80(1):1–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Noyes RW, Hertig AT, Rock J (1950) Dating the endometrial biopsy. Fertil Steril 1:3–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Practice Committee of the ASRM (2015) Current clinical irrelevance of luteal phase deficiency: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 103:e27–e32Google Scholar
  42. Pritts EA, Atwood AK (2002) Luteal phase support in infertility treatment: a meta-analysis of the randomized trials. Hum Reprod 17(9):2287–2299CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Proctor A et al (2006) Effect of progesterone supplementation in early pregnancy on the pregnancy outcome after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 85(5):1550–1552CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Qublan H et al (2006) Luteinized unruptured follicle syndrome: incidence and recurrence rate in infertile women with unexplained infertility undergoing intrauterine insemination. Hum Reprod 21(8):2110–2113CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Saccone G et al (2017) Supplementation with progestogens in the first trimester of pregnancy to prevent miscarriage in women with unexplained recurrent miscarriage: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Fertil Steril 107(2):430–438CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Soules MR et al (1989) Luteal phase deficiency: abnormal gonadotropin and progesterone secretion patterns. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 69(4):813–820CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Stephenson MD et al (2017) Luteal start vaginal micronized progesterone improves pregnancy success in women with recurrent pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril 107(3):684–690CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Szekeres-Bartho J, Balasch J (2008) Progestagen therapy for recurrent miscarriage. Hum Reprod Update 14(1):27–35CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Tournaye H, Sukhikh GT, Kahler E, Griesinger G (2017) A Phase III randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy, safety and tolerability of oral dydrogesterone versus micronized vaginal progesterone for luteal support in in vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 32(5):1019–1027CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. Usadi RS et al (2008) Endometrial development and function in experimentally induced luteal phase deficiency. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 93(10):4058–4064CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. Wilcox AJ, Baird DD, Weinberg CR (1999) Time of implantation of the conceptus and loss of pregnancy. N Engl J Med 340(23):1796–1799CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Yanushpolsky E et al (2010) Crinone vaginal gel is equally effective and better tolerated than intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles: a prospective randomized study. Fertil Steril 94(7):2596–2599CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Young SL et al (2017) Effect of randomized serum progesterone concentration on secretory endometrial histologic development and gene expression. Hum Reprod 32(9):1903–1914CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Facharzt-Zentrum für Kinderwunsch, Pränatale Medizin, Endokrinologie und Osteologieamedes experts HamburgHamburgDeutschland

Personalised recommendations