Ask Our Doctors – Archive
Our Medical Directors are outstanding physicians that you will find to be very personable and compassionate, who take care to ensure that you have the most cutting-edge fertility treatments at your disposal. This is your outlet to ask your questions to the doctors.
Dr. Sher –
My wife had a frozen embryo transplant 10 days prior. On day 8, we got beta level back of 17…which we thought was good. Now day 10, it is 23…which isn’t good growth. We go back in 5 days for another blood test. Shoot me straight.
Appreciate your knowledge.
Regrettably, this looks like a failing implantation (chemical pregnancy)
So Sorry.
Geoff Sher
Hello Dr. Sher,
In what instances would you transfer a mosaic embryo?
This is what we have, can you tell me which ones are transferable with minimal risk? I understand this may or may not work, but I would like to give it my best.
Embryo 1 : High Mosaic Partial Trisomy 11q 14.3-qter
Embryo 2: High Mosaic Partial Monosomy 10q 21.1-qter
Embryo 3: High Mosaic Partial Trisomy 12q 23.3-qter
If we try another cycle, it would be the 3rd cycle, would I get similar results? Should I move on to donor eggs and sperm?
please advise
I really think we should talk..see below!
Human embryo development occurs through a process that encompasses reprogramming, sequential cleavage divisions and mitotic chromosome segregation and embryonic genome activation. Chromosomal abnormalities may arise during germ cell and/or preimplantation embryo development, and represents a major cause of early pregnancy loss. About a decade ago, I and an associate, Levent Keskintepe PhD were the first to introduce full embryo karyotyping (identification of all 46 chromosomes) through preimplantation genetic sampling (PGS) as a method by which to selectively transfer only euploid embryos (i.e. those that have a full component of chromosomes) to the uterus. We subsequently reported on a 2-3 fold improvement in implantation and birth rates as well as a significant reduction in early pregnancy loss, following IVF. Since then PGS has grown dramatically in popularity such that it is now widely used throughout the world.
Most IVF programs that offer PGS services, require that all participating patients consent to all their aneuploid embryos (i.e. those with an irregular quota of chromosomes) be disposed of. However, there is now growing evidence to suggest that following embryo transfer, some aneuploid embryos will in the process of ongoing development, convert to the euploid state (i.e. “autocorrection”) and then go on to develop into chromosomally normal offspring. In fact, I am personally aware of several such cases occurring within our IVF network. So clearly , summarily discarding all aneuploid embryos as a matter of routine we are sometimes destroying some embryos that might otherwise have “autocorrected” and gone on to develop into normal offspring.
Thus by discarding aneuploid embryos the possibility exists that we could be denying some women the opportunity of having a baby. This creates a major ethical and moral dilemma for those of us that provide the option of PGS to our patients. On the one hand, we strive “to avoid knowingly doing harm” (the Hippocratic Oath) and as such would prefer to avoid or minimize the risk of miscarriage and/or chromosomal birth defects and on the other hand we would not wish to deny patients with aneuploid embryos, the opportunity to have a baby.
The basis for such embryo “autocorrection” lies in the fact that some embryos found through PGS-karyotyping to harbor one or more aneuploid cells (blastomeres) will often also harbor chromosomally normal (euploid) cells (blastomeres). The coexistence of both aneuploid and euploid cells coexisting in the same embryo is referred to as “mosaicism.” As stated, some mosaic embryos will In the process of subsequent cell replication convert to the normal euploid state (i.e. autocorrect)
It is against this background, that an ever increasing number of IVF practitioners, rather than summarily discard PGS-identified aneuploid embryos are now choosing to cryobanking (freeze-store) certain of them, to leave open the possibility of ultimately transferring them to the uterus. In order to best understand the complexity of the factors involved in such decision making, it is essential to understand the causes of embryo aneuploidy of which there are two varieties:
1.Meiotic aneuploidy” results from aberrations in chromosomal numerical configuration that originate in either the egg (most commonly) and/or in sperm, during preconceptual maturational division (meiosis). Since meiosis occurs in the pre-fertilized egg or in and sperm, it follows that when aneuploidy occurs due to defective meiosis, all subsequent cells in the developing embryo/blastocyst/conceptus inevitably will be aneuploid, precluding subsequent “autocorrection”. Meiotic aneuploidy will thus invariably be perpetuated in all the cells of the embryo as they replicate. It is a permanent phenomenon and is irreversible. All embryos so affected are thus fatally damaged. Most will fail to implant and those that do implant will either be lost in early pregnancy or develop into chromosomally defective offspring (e.g. Down syndrome, Edward syndrome, Turner syndrome).
2.“Mitotic aneuploidy” occurs when following fertilization and subsequent cell replication (cleavage), some cells (blastomeres) of a meiotically euploid early embryo mutate and become aneuploid. This is referred to as mosaicism. Thereupon, with continued subsequent cell replication (mitosis) the chromosomal make-up (karyotype) of the embryo might either comprise of predominantly aneuploid cells or euploid cells. The subsequent viability or competency of the conceptus will thereupon depend on whether euploid or aneuploid cells predominate. If in such mosaic embryos aneuploid cells predominate, the embryo will be “incompetent”). If (as is frequently the case) euploid cells prevail, the mosaic embryo will be “competent” and capable of propagating a normal conceptus.
Since some mitotically aneuploid (“mosaic”) embryos can, and indeed do “autocorrect’ while meiotically aneuploid embryos cannot, it follows that an ability to differentiate between these two varieties of aneuploidy would be of considerable clinical value. And would provide a strong argument in favor of preserving certain aneuploid embryos for future dispensation.
Aneuploidy, involves the addition (trisomy) or subtraction (monosomy) of one chromosome in a given pair. As previously stated, some aneuploidies are meiotic in origin while others are mitotic “mosaics”. Certain aneuploidies involve only a single, chromosome pair (simple aneuploidy) while others involve more than a single pair (i.e. complex aneuploidy). Aside from monosomy involving absence of the y-sex chromosome (i.e. XO) which can resulting in a live birth (Turner syndrome) all monosomies involving autosomes (non-sex chromosomes) are lethal and will not result in viable offspring). Some autosomal meiotic aneuploidies, especially trisomies 13, 18, 21, can progress to viable, but severely chromosomally defective babies. All other meiotic autosomal trisomies will almost invariably, either not attach to the uterine lining or upon attachment, will soon be rejected. All forms of meiotic aneuploidy are irreversible while mitotic aneuploidy (“mosaicism) often autocorrects in the uterus. Most complex aneuploidies are meiotic in origin and will almost invariably fail to propagate viable pregnancies.
There is presently no practical test that can reliable differentiate between meiotic and mitotic aneuploidy. Notwithstanding this, the fact that some “mosaic” embryos can autocorrect in the uterus, makes a strong argument in favor of transferring aneuploid of embryos in the hope that the one(s) transferred might be “mosaic” and might propagate viable healthy pregnancies. On the other hand, it is the fear that embryo aneuploidy might result in a chromosomally abnormal baby that has led many IVF physicians to strongly oppose the transfer of aneuploid embryos to the uterus.
Certain meiotic aneuploid trisomy embryos (e.g. trisomies 13, 18, & 21) can and sometimes do, result in aneuploid concepti. Thus, in my opinion, unless the woman/couple receiving such embryos is willing to commit to terminating a resulting pregnancy found through amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling (CVS) to be so affected, she/they are probably best advised not to transfer such embryos. Other autosomal trisomy embryos will hardly ever produce viable euploid concepti and can thus, in my opinion be transferred in the hope that auto correction will occur in-utero. However, in all cases, and amniocentesis or CVS should be performed to make certain that the baby is euploid. Conversely, no autosomal monosomy embryos are believed to be capable of resulting in viable pregnancies, thereby making the transfer of autosomal monosomy embryos, in the hope that they are “mosaic”, a far less risky proposition. Needless to say, if such action is being contemplated in any such cases, it is absolutely essential to make full disclosure to the patient (s) , and to insure the completion of a detailed informed consent agreement which would include a commitment by the patient (s) to undergo prenatal genetic testing (amniocentesis/CVS) aimed at excluding a chromosomal defect in the developing baby and/or a willingness to terminate the pregnancy should a serious birth defect be diagnosed.
Geoff Sher
800-780-7437
Hey Dr. Sher, how much merit do you give to embryo grading? (assuming no PGS testing). I’ve heard it matters– I’ve heard it doesn’t matter and “low graded” embryos implant all the time. Is there any actual research in this to suggest a significant difference in viable pregnancies in A, B, and C graded embryos?
On a more personal not, our clinic *says* they grade very stringent. It’s also frustrating because they seem to use a different embryo grading scale. Rather than have a number, they just use letters (A-D).
Our embryo that took was a Day 5 BBB. We then tried a Day 6 BBB and it was unsuccessful. We have a 5-day BCC left and I’m just trying to set realistic expectations.
I’m 30 (28 at egg retrieval); my husband was 26 at egg retrieval. Both healthy, I just don’t ovulate on my own. Used the long down reg protocol you recommend to most women for IVF. With that said, can you give me a ballpark estimate of what you think our chances of success are?
Embryo grading is helpful but now that most opt for blastocyst transfer, it supersedes morphological grading of the cleaved embryo…so we do not do trhis any longer.
The potential for a woman’s eggs to undergo orderly development and maturation, while in large part being genetically determined can be profoundly influenced by the woman’s age, her “ovarian reserve” and proximity to menopause. It is also influenced by the protocol used for controlled ovarian stimulation (COH) which by fashioning the intra-ovarian hormonal environment, profoundly impacts egg development and maturation.
After the menarche (age at which menstruation starts) a monthly process of repeatedly processing eggs continues until the menopause, by which time most eggs will have been used up, and ovulation and menstruation cease. When the number of eggs remaining in the ovaries falls below a certain threshold, ovarian function starts to wane over a 5 to10-years. This time period is referred to as the climacteric. With the onset of the climacteric, blood Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH) and later also Luteinizing Hormone (LH) levels begin to rise…. at first slowly and then more rapidly, ultimately culminating in the complete cessation of ovulation and menstruation (i.e. menopause).
One of the early indications that the woman has entered the climacteric and that ovarian reserve is diminishing DOR) , is the detection of a basal blood FSH level above 9.0 MIU/ml and/ or an AMH level og <2.0ng/ml.
Prior to the changes that immediately precede ovulation, virtually all human eggs have 23 pairs (i.e. 46) of chromosomes. Thirty six to forty hours prior to ovulation, a surge occurs in the release of LH by the pituitary gland. One of the main e purposes of this LH surge is to cause the chromosomes in the egg to divide n half (to 23 in number) in order that once fertilized by a mature sperm ends up having 23 chromosomes) the resulting embryo will be back to having 46 chromosomes. A “competent” mature egg is one that has precisely 23 chromosomes, not any more or any less. It is largely the egg, rather than the sperm that determines the chromosomal integrity of the embryo and only an embryo that has a normal component of 46 chromosomes (i.e. euploid) is “competent” to develop into a healthy baby. If for any reason the final number of chromosomes in the egg is less or more than 23 (aneuploid), it will be incapable of propagating a euploid, “competent” embryo. Thus egg/embryo aneuploidy (“incompetence”) is the leading cause of human reproductive dysfunction which can manifest as: arrested embryo development and/or failed implantation (which often presents as infertility), early miscarriage or chromosomal birth defects (e.g. Down’s syndrome). While most aneuploid (“incompetent”) embryos often fail to produce a pregnancy, some do. However, most such pregnancies miscarry early on. On relatively rare occasions, depending on the chromosome pair involved, aneuploid embryos can develop into chromosomally defective babies (e.g. Down’s syndrome).
Up until a woman reaches her mid- thirties, at best, 1:2 of her eggs will likely be chromosomally normal. As she ages beyond her mid-thirties there will be a a progressive decline in egg quality such that by age 40 years only about 15%-20% of eggs are euploid and, by the time the woman reaches her mid-forties, less than 10% of her eggs are likely to be chromosomally normal. While most aneuploid embryos do appear to be microscopically abnormal under the light microscope, this is not invariably so. In fact, many aneuploid embryos a have a perfectly normal appearance under the microscope. This is why it is not possible to reliably differentiate between competent and incompetent embryos on the basis of their microscopic appearance (morphologic grade) alone.
The process of natural selection usually precludes most aneuploid embryos from attaching to the uterine lining. Those that do attach usually do so for such only a brief period of time. In such cases the woman often will not even experience a postponement of menstruation. There will be a transient rise in blood hCG levels but in most cases the woman will be unaware of even having conceived (i.e. a “chemical pregnancy”). Alternatively, an aneuploid embryo might attach for a period of a few weeks before being expelled (i.e. a “miscarriage”). Sometimes (fortunately rarely) an aneuploid embryo will develop into a viable baby that is born with a chromosomal birth defect (e.g. Down’s syndrome).
The fact that the incidence of embryo aneuploidy invariably increases with advancing age serves to explain why reproductive failure (“infertility”, miscarriages and birth defects), also increases as women get older.
It is an over-simplification to represent that diminishing ovarian reserve as evidenced by raised FSH blood levels (and other tests) and reduced response to stimulation with fertility drugs is a direct cause of “poor egg/ embryo quality”. This common misconception stems from the fact that poor embryo quality (“incompetence”) often occurs in women who at the same time, because of the advent of the climacteric also have elevated basal blood FSH/LH levels and reduced AMH. But it is not the elevation in FSH or the low AMH that causes embryo “incompetence”. Rather it is the effect of advancing age (the “biological clock”) resulting a progressive increase in the incidence of egg aneuploidy, which is responsible for declining egg quality. Simply stated, as women get older “wear and tear” on their eggs increases the likelihood of egg and thus embryo aneuploidy. It just so happens that the two precipitating factors often go hand in hand.
The importance of the IVF stimulation protocol on egg/embryo quality cannot be overstated. This factor seems often to be overlooked or discounted by those IVF practitioners who use a “one-size-fits-all” approach to ovarian stimulation. My experience is that the use of individualized/customized COS protocols can greatly improve IVF outcome in patients at risk – particularly those with diminished ovarian reserve (“poor responders”) and those who are “high responders” (women with PCOS , those with dysfunctional or absent ovulation, and young women under 25 years of age).
While no one can influence underlying genetics or turn back the clock on a woman’s age, any competent IVF specialist should be able to tailor the protocol for COS to meet the individual needs of the patient.
During the normal ovulation cycle, ovarian hormonal changes are regulated to avoid irregularities in production and interaction that could adversely influence follicle development and egg quality. As an example, small amounts of androgens (male hormones such as testosterone) that are produced by the ovarian stroma (the tissue surrounding ovarian follicles) during the pre-ovulatory phase of the cycle enhance late follicle development, estrogen production by the granulosa cells (cells that line the inner walls of follicles), and egg maturation.
However, over-production of testosterone can adversely influence the same processes. It follows that protocols for controlled ovarian stimulation (COS should be geared toward optimizing follicle growth and development (without placing the woman at risk from overstimulation), while at the same time avoiding excessive ovarian androgen production. Achievement of such objectives requires a very individualized approach to choosing the protocol for COS with fertility drugs as well as the precise timing of the “trigger shot” of hCG.
It is important to recognize that the pituitary gonadotropins, LH and FSH, while both playing a pivotal role in follicle development, have different primary sites of action in the ovary. The action of FSH is mainly directed towards the cells lining the inside of the follicle that are responsible for estrogen production. LH, on the other hand, acts primarily on the ovarian stroma to produce male hormones/ androgens (e.g. androstenedione and testosterone). A small amount of testosterone is necessary for optimal estrogen production. Over-production of such androgens can have a deleterious effect on granulosa cell activity, follicle growth/development, egg maturation, fertilization potential and subsequent embryo quality. Furthermore, excessive ovarian androgens can also compromise estrogen-induced endometrial growth and development.
In conditions such as polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), which is characterized by increased blood LH levels, there is also increased ovarian androgen production. It is therefore not surprising that “poor egg/embryo quality” is often a feature of this condition. The use of LH-containing preparations such as Menopur further aggravates this effect. Thus we recommend using FSH-dominant products such as Follistim, Puregon, and Gonal-F in such cases. While it would seem prudent to limit LH exposure in all cases of COS, this appears to be more vital in older women, who tend to be more sensitive to LH
It is common practice to administer gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) agonists such as Lupron, and, GnRH-antagonists such as Ganirelix and Orgalutron to prevent the release of LH during COS. GnRH agonists exert their LH-lowering effect over a number of days. They act by causing an initial outpouring followed by a depletion of pituitary gonadotropins. This results in the LH level falling to low concentrations, within 4-7 days, thereby establishing a relatively “LH-free environment”. GnRH Antagonists, on the other hand, act very rapidly (within a few hours) to block pituitary LH release, so as achieve the same effect.
Long Agonist (Lupron/Buserelin) Protocols: The most commonly prescribed protocol for Lupron/gonadotropin administration is the so-called “long protocol”. Here, Lupron is given, starting a week or so prior to menstruation. This results in an initial rise in FSH and LH level, which is rapidly followed by a precipitous fall to near zero. It is followed by uterine withdrawal bleeding (menstruation), whereupon gonadotropin treatment is initiated while daily Lupron injections continue, to ensure a “low LH” environment. A modification to the long protocol which I prefer using in cases of DOR, is the Agonist/Antagonist Conversion Protocol (A/ACP) where, upon the onset of a Lupron-induced bleed , this agonist is supplanted by an antagonist (Ganirelix/Cetrotide/Orgalutron) and this is continued until the hCG trigger. In many such cases I supplement with human growth hormone (HGH) to try and further enhance response and egg development.
Lupron Flare/Micro-Flare Protocol: Another approach to COS is by way of so-called “(micro) flare protocols”. This involves initiating gonadotropin therapy simultaneous with the administration of GnRH agonist (e.g. Lupron/Buserelin). The intent here is to deliberately allow Lupron to elicit an initial surge (“flare”) in pituitary FSH release in order to augment FSH administration by increased FSH production. Unfortunately, this “spring board effect” represents “a double edged sword” because while it indeed increases the release of FSH, it at the same time causes a surge in LH release. The latter can evoke excessive ovarian stromal androgen production which could potentially compromise egg quality, especially in older women and women with PCOS, whose ovaries have increased sensitivity to LH. I am of the opinion that by evoking an exaggerated ovarian androgen response, such “(micro) flare protocols” can harm egg/embryo quality and reduce IVF success rates, especially in older women, and in women with diminished ovarian reserve. Accordingly, I do not prescribe them at all.
Estrogen Priming – My approach for “Poor Responders” Our patients who have demonstrated reduced ovarian response to COS as well as those who by way of significantly raised FSH blood levels are likely to be “poor responders”, are treated using a “modified” long protocol. The approach involves the initial administration of GnRH agonist for a number of days to cause pituitary down-regulation. Upon menstruation and confirmation by ultrasound and measurement of blood estradiol levels that adequate ovarian suppression has been achieved, the dosage of GnRH agonist is drastically lowered and the woman is given twice-weekly injections of estradiol for a period of 8. COS is thereupon initiated using a relatively high dosage of FSH-(Follistim, Bravelle, Puregon or Gonal F) which is continued along with daily administration of GnRH agonist until the “hCG trigger.” By this approach we have been able to significantly improve ovarian response to gonadotropins in many of hitherto “resistant patients”.
The “Trigger”: hCG (Profasi/Pregnyl/Novarel) versus Lupron: With ovulation induction using fertility drugs, the administration of 10,000U hCGu (the hCG “trigger”) mimics the LH surge, sending the eggs (which up to that point are immature (M1) and have 46 chromosomes) into maturational division (meiosis) This process is designed to halve the chromosome number , resulting in mature eggs (M2) that will have 23 chromosomes rather that the 46 chromosomes it had prior to the “trigger”. Such a chromosomally normal, M2 egg, upon being fertilized by mature sperm (that following maturational division also has 23 chromosomes) will hopefully propagate embryos that have 46 chromosomes and will be “:competent” to propagate viable pregnancies. The key is to trigger with no less than 10,000U of hCGu (Profasi/Novarel/Pregnyl) and if hCGr (Ovidrel) is used, to make sure that 500mcg (rather than 250mcg) is administered. In my opinion, any lesser dosage will reduce the efficiency of meiosis, and increase the risk of the eggs being chromosomally abnormal. . I also do not use the agonist (Lupron) “trigger”. This approach which is often recommended for women at risk of overstimulation, is intended to reduce the risk of OHSS. The reason for using the Lupron trigger is that by inducing a surge in the release of LH by the pituitary gland it reduces the risk of OHSS. This is true, but this comes at the expense of egg quality because the extent of the induced LH surge varies and if too little LH is released, meiosis can be compromised, thereby increasing the percentage of chromosomally abnormal and of immature (M1) eggs. The use of “coasting” in such cases (see below) can obviate this effect.
Severe Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome (OHSS): Women with certain types of absent or dysfunctional ovulation as well as those who have polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) are highly sensitive to gonadotropins and are at risk of developing OHSS. Such women are also more likely than others to produce poor quality eggs/embryos which, they are often led to believe is attributable to an intrinsic egg defect that is characteristic of their PCOS condition. This is not necessarily so. The most likely reason as to why many women with PCOS develop an excessive number of follicles and then go on to produce poor quality eggs/embryos has to do with the fact that, in an attempt to contain reduce the risk of OHSS they are often administered hCG prematurely – prior to the attainment of optimal egg maturation.
“Prolonged Coasting”: In the early nineties, we introduced “Prolonged Coasting”, a procedure which eliminates the risk of OHSS while allowing the hCG trigger to be deferred for long enough as to allow for optimal follicle/egg maturation to take place. Coasting involves withholding gonadotropin therapy while the administration of GnRH agonist/antagonist is continued. The daily measurement of blood estradiol is continued until the concentration drops below a safe threshold level, at which time HCG is administered (regardless of the number of follicles). When appropriately implemented “coasting” results in the production of good quality eggs/embryos, in circumstances where this might otherwise not have been possible.
Call 800-780-7437 and set up a Skype consultation with me to discuss.
Geoff Sher
Hi Dr Sher, do you also recommend halving dose of lupron (to 5u) on CD1 of period with a lupron day 21 start? Or is it only for lupron cycles with BCP?
Same for both!
Geoff Sher
Hi Doc,
I have large fibroids, i dont want to have them surgically removed. I am currently ttc. Please i want to know if i can take fertil aid and ova boost . Or will they make the fibroids grow?.
Thank you.
It depends on their size and especially whether they are protruding into the uterine cavity.
Fibroids or leiomyomas are non-malignant muscle tumors that grow in the uterine wall. They can be found in about one out of every five (1:5) women >30Y of age. Fibroids are far more prevalent in African Americans and women and less frequent in other ethnic groups (i.e. Caucasians and Asians).
Fibroids, enlarge and/or distort uterine configuration. They can produce symptoms such as heavy, painful and prolonged menstrual periods. Other symptoms include pain with intercourse, backache, severe abdominal pain when large fibroids run out of blood supply or when superficial fibroids on a stem (pedunculated) undergo twisting (torsion). Sometimes fibroids will protrude into the uterine cavity, cause severe cramping and bleeding and so irritate the uterine lining as to compromise embryo attachment (anatomical implantation dysfunction). Women with fibroids are also at greater risk of miscarriage, premature delivery, malposition of the baby (mandating cesarean delivery) and an increased risk of bleeding after birth (post-partum hemorrhage)
Diagnosis can be made by one or more of the following symptoms/presentations: Symptomatology, pelvic examination pelvic ultrasound, hysterosalpingogram (HSG), sonohysterogram (HSN), CT-scan or MRI..
Fibroids are classified as:
•Submucosal: Here the fibroid grows just under the lining of the uterine cavity (mucosa) or protrudes into the uterine cavity. They might mold into the underlying uterine muscle (sessile) or be on a stalk (pedunculated). Submucosal fibroids can change the shape of the uterine cavity, irritate the lining and prevent implantation, cause miscarriage. These lesions must be removed in their entirety prior to undertaking embryo transfer, usually hysteroscopically. (see below)
•Subserosal: – Here the tumors grow under the outer layer (serosa) of the uterus. These fibroids will not compromise implantation, but if they are large, causing severe pain, and especially if they are multiple, pedunculated and thus at risk of undergoing torsion (twisting) the3y should be removed, usually laparoscopically. (See below).
•Intramural: – when the fibroids develop within the muscular wall of the uterus. This is the commonest presentation. Unless they are large and multiple and do not encroach on the uterine cavity, they can be left alone Surgical removal is usually by laparoscopy or laparotomy/abdominal open incision (See below)
The uterus is composed of a thick layer of smooth muscle (myometrium) surrounding the endometrial lining into which the embryo implants and which serves to protect and nourish a growing pregnancy. These tumors are rarely malignant (see below). Fibroid tumors, even large ones, can occur without producing any symptoms at all.
For the most part, only those fibroids that impinge upon the uterine (endometrial) cavity (submucosal) affect fertility. Exceptions include large fibroids in the muscle wall of the uterus (intramural) that can block the openings of the fallopian tubes as they enter the uterus, and where multiple fibroids cause abnormal uterine contraction patterns.
In some cases multiple uterine fibroids may so deprive the uterine lining (endometrium) of blood flow, that the delivery of estrogen to the endometrium is curtailed to the point that the lining cannot thicken sufficient to support a pregnancy. This can result in early 1st trimester (prior to the 13th week of pregnancy) miscarriages. Large or multiple fibroids, by curtailing the ability of the uterus to stretch in order to accommodate the spatial needs of a rapidly growing pregnancy, may precipitate 2nd trimester (beyond the 13th week) miscarriages and/or trigger the onset of premature labor.
Sizable fibroid tumors are usually easily identified by simple vaginal examination. However, even the smallest fibroid can be identified by transvaginal ultrasound. Sometimes it is difficult to tell if the fibroid is impinging on the uterine cavity. In such cases, a hysteroscopy (where a telescope like instrument, inserted via the vagina into the uterine cavity) or a sonohysterogram where injected fluid, distends the uterine cavity allowing for examination of its inner configuration can help distinguish between intramural and submucosal fibroids. CT scan and MRI can also be used to distinguish between fibroid tumors and another condition that also involves affects the uterine muscular wall, known as adenomyosis. This condition is characterized by endometrial tissue growing deeply into the uterine wall.. Given the often-diffuse nature of adenomyosis, it can be very difficult to remove surgically. This contrasts with fibroid tumors, which are well defined and are usually easily removed.
Surgical Treatment: The mainstay for the treatment of fibroid tumors is surgical removal (myomectomy). Small, asymptomatic fibroids that do not impinge upon the endometrial cavity will usually not require treatment other than observation and vigilance. Large fibroids and submucosal fibroids should be removed prior to starting fertility treatments such as In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) in order to decrease the chance of implantation failure, miscarriage, pregnancy complications and premature labor. Intramural and subserosal fibroids are readily removable by laparoscopic resection or via an abdominal incision. The former allows for a more rapid convalescence and is ideal for the removal of small and accessible superficial fibroid tumors, while the latter approach is preferred for treating larger and less accessible fibroids.
Myomectomy can affect fertility in several ways. If the endometrial cavity is entered during the surgery, there is a possibility of post adhesions forming within the uterine cavity. This should always be checked by the performance of a hysteroscopy or through a sonohysterogram, prior to beginning fertility treatment. Because myomectomy can be bloody, there is a high likelihood of post-operative abdominal adhesion formation, which could bind down or encase the ovaries, preventing the release of the eggs, or block the ends of the fallopian tubes. For this reason, it is important that myomectomies be formed only by accomplished surgeons, who are familiar with techniques to limit blood loss and prevent adhesion formation.
Regardless of whether the laparoscopic or abdominal approach is employed, adequate closure of the uterine wall is essential in order to reduce the subsequent risk of uterine rupture during pregnancy or labor. This is one of the main arguments used against the use of laparoscopic removal of large, multiple or remotely situated fibroids. While laparoscopic myomectomy requires but a few days (at most) for post-operative convalescence, abdominal myomectomy usually requires 6-8 weeks of recovery time. When myomectomy necessitates or results in the uterine cavity being entered (purposefully or inadvertently), it should always be followed up with a “2nd look” hysteroscopy to rule out scar tissue formation, which occurs frequently in the presence of submucosal fibroids.
Uterine polyps (and in some cases, also submucosal fibroids), can usually be removed hysteroscopically (through the vagina). This eliminates the need for abdominal surgery and greatly reduces the recovery time. Hysteroscopic surgery is only useful if the majority of the fibroid protrudes into the endometrial cavity, ensuring that the tumor defect will not be too large. This surgery is often done under laparoscopic guidance, to reduce the risk of uterine perforation. After hysteroscopic surgery it is often advisable to prescribe cyclical hormonal therapy for a few months to encourage regeneration of the endometrial lining over the area of tumor defect and healing of the uterine muscle. A 2nd look hysteroscopy should be performed a few months later in all cases, to rule out scar tissue formation even if it means delaying or deferring the initiation of definitive fertility treatment.
Medical Treatment: The growth of fibroid tumors is estrogen-dependent. Thus when a woman enters menopause and stops making female hormones, fibroids tend to shrink in size on their own. Conditions that mimic menopause can also reduce the size of fibroid tumors. The most common of theses treatment is with a medication such as leuprolide acetate (Lupron), which shuts off the communication of the brain with the ovaries, preventing hormone production. However, this type of medication can only be taken for a limited period (usually 6 months) and once the medication is stopped the fibroids will usually regain their original size within a few months. The medication is therefore only a “temporary fix,” used mostly to decrease the size of large fibroids in order to make their ultimate surgical removal easier, or to help a woman bridge the gap until spontaneous menopause sets in. For the majority of women there is no major benefit from Lupron therapy prior to surgery.
Embolization of Fibroid Tumors: Myomectomy always carries the small (although infrequent) risk that severe, uncontrollable intra-operative bleeding could require the performance of a hysterectomy (complete removal of the uterus) as a life saving measure. Moreover, some women are poor candidates for surgery. This is where a new procedure known as embolization comes in. Embolization is a procedure in which small particles are injected into the arteries of the uterus under radiological guidance to shut off the blood supply to the fibroids, in the hope that they will “shrink” and perhaps, even disappear.
Embolization is relatively new to the field of gynecology and little is known about its potential effects on future fertility. We are concerned that in the process of shutting off the blood supply to the uterus, it will permanently so reduce endometrial blood flow, as to compromise embryo implantation. For this reason, I do not currently recommend this therapy for women who still wish to conceive and carry a baby in their uterus. At present, it seems best suited for symptomatic women who are finished with their childbearing or who are planning to use a gestational surrogate.
Malignant Change in Fibroid Tumors: Fibroids rarely undergo malignant change. The reported incidence is less than 1 in 2000 cases. Fibroids usually grow very slowly (over a number of years). However, when growth occurs rapidly over a month or two, especially in older women who have large fibroids, it should raise the suspicion of this very rare but extremely serious complication.
Geoff Sher