(1) Background: Several researchers have investigated alternative markers related to ovarian responsiveness in order to better predict IVF outcomes, particularly in advanced reproductive-aged women. The follicular output rate (FORT), the follicle-oocyte index (FOI) and the ovarian sensitivity index (OSI) are among the most promising. However, these three metrics have not been investigated as independent predictors of live birth in women of advanced reproductive age; neither have they been compared to the two ‘component’ characteristics that are used to calculate them. (2) Methods: A logistic regression model containing all relevant predictors of ovarian reserve or response was used to evaluate the potential of FORT, FOI and OSI as predictors of live birth. After, the non-linear associations between FORT, FOI and OSI and the probability of live birth were evaluated. Finally, we fitted multiple logistic regression models to compare whether FORT, FOI and OSI were more informative predictors than their components. (3) Results: 590 couples received a total of 740 IVF cycles, after which, 127 (17.5%) obtained a live birth. None of FORT, FOI and OSI showed a strength of association or a p-value even close to female age (odds ratio for live birth (95% confidence interval) 1.00 (0.99–1.01), 1.00 (0.99–1.01), 0.98 (0.88–1.11) and 0.58 (0.48–0.72), respectively). The three models comparing FORT, FOI and OSI with the number of oocytes retrieved, the AFC, the number of preovulatory follicles and the FSH total dose were not more informative. (4) Conclusions: In a population of women of advanced age with unexplained infertility, none of FORT, FOI and OSI were predictive of live birth or more predictive than the two ‘component’ characteristics that were used to calculate them. We suggest clinicians and researchers still use female age as the most reliable predictor of an IVF treatment.

We retrospectively studied a real-life population of 1470 women undergoing IVF, with poor/suboptimal/normal ovarian responsiveness to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS), comparing the cumulative live birth rate (cLBR) when COS was performed using rFSH alone or rFSH + rLH in a 2:1 ratio. Overall, we observed significantly higher cLBR in the rFSH alone group than in the rFSH + rLH group (29.3% vs. 22.2%, p < 0.01). However, considering only suboptimal/poor responders (n = 309), we observed comparable cLBR (15.6% vs. 15.2%, p = 0.95) despite the fact that patients receiving rFSH + rLH had significantly higher ages and worse ovarian reserve markers. The equivalent effectiveness of rFSH + rLH and rFSH alone was further confirmed after stratification according to the number of oocytes retrieved: despite basal characteristics were still in favor of rFSH alone group, the cLBR always resulted comparable. Even subdividing patients according to the POSEIDON classification, irrespective of differences in the baseline clinical characteristics in favor of FSH alone group, the cLBR resulted comparable in all subgroups. Despite the retrospective, real-life analysis, our data suggest that rLH supplementation in COS may represent a reasonable option for patients with predictable or unexpected poor/suboptimal ovarian responsiveness to FSH, those matching the Bologna criteria for poor responsiveness, and those included in the POSEIDON classification.

Herein we aimed at assessing whether Myo-Inositol (MI), Alpha–Lipoic acid (ALA), and Folic acid (FA) could improve oocyte quality and embryo development in non-PCOS overweight/obese women undergoing IVF. Three hundred and twenty-four mature oocytes were obtained from non-PCOS overweight/obese patients, randomized to receive either MI, ALA, and FA (MI + ALA + FA group, n = 155 oocytes) or FA alone (FA-only group, n = 169 oocytes). Oocytes were examined using Polarized Light Microscopy to assess morphological features of zona pellucida (ZP) and meiotic spindle (MS). One hundred and seventy-six embryos (n = 84 in the MI + ALA + FA group, n = 92 in the FA-only group) were assessed by conventional morphology on days 2 and 5, as well as using the Time-Lapse System morphokinetic analysis. A significantly higher ZP retardance, area, and thickness (p < 0.05), and a shorter MS axis (p < 0.05) were observed in the MI + ALA + FA group, suggesting a positive effect on oocyte quality. Conventional morphology evaluation on day 2 showed a higher mean embryo score in the MI + ALA + FA group, whereas embryo morphokinetic was comparable in the two groups. Overall, our data show a possible beneficial effect of the combination of MI, ALA, and FA on oocyte and embryo morphology, encouraging testing of this combination in adequately powered randomized trials to assess their impact of clinical IVF results.