Liate of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany), for her assistance in Liate of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany), for her assistance in PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26437915 the preparation of this manuscript. Author details Faculty of Economics, Universit?Catholique de Louvain (UCL Mons), 7000 Mons, Belgium. 2Faculty of Medicine, the University of Melbourne, Melbourne 3010, Victoria, Australia. 3Unit for Human Reproduction, 1st Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Medical School, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece. 4Fertility Global Clinical Development Unit, EMD Serono, Inc, Rockland, MA 02370, USA (an affiliate of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany). 5Formerly Merck Serono S.A, Geneva, Switzerland (an affiliate of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany). 6Preglem SA, Chemin du Pr?Fleuri 3, 1228, Plan-les-Ouates, Geneva, Switzerland. 7 Biosensors, rue de Lausanne 31, 1100 Morges, Switzerland.Conclusions This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that r-hLH supplementation of r-hFSH compared with rhFSH alone may result in benefits in terms of clinical pregnancy rate in the overall pooled population, as well as in poor responders. In addition, a benefit for r-hFSH plus r-hLH versus r-hFSH alone may be seen for the number of oocytes retrieved in poor responders. Additional filesAdditional file 1: Supplementary Material A-D. Additional file 2: Table S1. Search strategy for the MEDLINE database. Additional file 3: Table S2. Missing data imputation calculations and coefficient determinations. Additional file 4: Figure S1. Funnel plot of effect size by standard error for number of oocytes. Additional file 5: Figure S2. Radial Galbraith plot for number of oocytes to assess the consistency of the observed outcomes with different precisions. Additional file 6: Table S3. Study typology analysis for the co-primary endpoints (difference between the r-hFSH plus r-hLH and r-hFSH alone groups). Additional file 7: PRISMA checklist.Received: 5 November 2013 Accepted: 12 February 2014 Published: 20 February 2014 References 1. Hill MJ, Levy G, Levens ED: Does exogenous LH in ovarian stimulation improve assisted reproduction success? An appraisal of the literature. Reprod Biomed Online 2012, 24:261?71.Lehert et al. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 2014, 12:17 http://www.rbej.com/content/12/1/Page 12 of2. 3. 22.214.171.124. 126.96.36.199. 188.8.131.52.184.108.40.206.20.21.22.Fischer R: Understanding the role of LH: myths and facts. Reprod Biomed Online 2007, 15:468?77. Sen A, Caiazza F: Oocyte maturation: a story of arrest and release. Front Biosci (Schol Ed) 2013, 5:451?77. Shoham Z, Schacter M, Loumaye E, Weissman A, NIK333 web MacNamee M, Insler V: The luteinizing hormone surge he final stage in ovulation induction: modern aspects of ovulation triggering. Fertil Steril 1995, 64:237?51. Sommer L, Zanger K, Dyong T, Dorn C, Luckhaus J, Diedrich K, Klingmuller D: Seven-day administration of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist Cetrorelix in PubMed ID:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28212752 normal cycling women. Eur J Endocrinol 1994, 131:280?85. Doody K, Devroey P, Gordon K, Witjes H, Mannaerts B: LH concentrations do not correlate with pregnancy in rFSH/GnRH antagonist cycles. Reprod Biomed Online 2010, 20:565?67. UK Summary of product characteristics Luveris 75 IU. 2013 [http://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/medicine/8289/spc] European Recombinant Human LH Study Group: Recombinant human luteinizing hormone (LH) to support recombinant human folliclestimulating hormone (FSH)-induced follicular development in LH- and FSH-deficient anovulatory women: a dose-finding study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1998,.