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.
Hello Dr. Sher,
Tomorrow 12/18 is my FET, when I went in for bloodwork and ultrasound my lining was only a 6. At my previous check up at CD15 it was 7, CD 10 it was 8, and CD 6 was 5. I asked the doctor on call how it would have shrunk and she said the PIO shots can sometimes compact the lining, but no further explanation. I emailed my RE last week when I saw the number drop, she was confident I’d be an 8 by today. I’ve followed up to that message today asking for more details and expressing my concerns of having a thin lining, and still waiting for her response. I am concerned they don’t want to delay the transfer a couple of days. I have been taking Estrace 3x a day (2mg each time), medrol and doxycycline. Also, during stims my lining was anywhere between 8-9, so it just isn’t making sense to me. Another note, I’m on synthroid due to hypothyroidism causes from my stim cycle and thought that might be counterindicated to the Estrace (my TSH is at 1.8). Any last minute protocol to improve my number by tomorrow? Such as Estrace vaginal suppository? I appreciate your feedback!
It is the maximum measurement while on estrogen that counts. After progesterone, the thickness is NOT relevant. It must be >8mm at that point….ideally >9mm.
It was as far back as 1989, when I first published a study that examined the correlation between the thickness of a woman’s uterine lining (the endometrium), and the subsequent successful implantation of embryos in IVF patients. This study revealed that when the uterine lining measured <8mm in thickness by the day of the “hCG trigger” (in fresh IVF cycles), or at the time of initiating progesterone therapy (in embryo recipient cycles, e.g. frozen embryo transfers-FET, egg donation-IVF etc.) , pregnancy and birth rates were substantially improved. Currently, it is my opinion, that an ideal estrogen-promoted endometrial lining should ideally measure at least 9mm in thickness and that an endometrial lining measuring 8-9mm is “intermediate”. An estrogenic lining of <8mm is in most cases unlikely to yield a viable pregnancy.
A “poor” uterine lining is usually the result of the innermost layer of endometrium (the basal or germinal endometrium from which endometrium grows) ) not being able to respond to estrogen by propagating an outer, “functional” layer thick enough to support optimal embryo implantation and development of a healthy placenta (placentation). The “functional” layer ultimately comprises 2/3 of the full endometrial thickness and is the layer that sheds with menstruation in the event that no pregnancy occurs.
The main causes of a “poor” uterine lining are:
1.Damage to the basal endometrium as a result of:
a.Inflammation of the endometrium (endometritis) most commonly resulting from infected products left over following abortion, miscarriage or birth
b.Surgical trauma due to traumatic uterine scraping, (i.e. due to an over-aggressive D & C)
2.Insensitivity of the basal endometrium to estrogen due to:
a.Prolonged , over-use/misuse of clomiphene citrate
b.Prenatal exposure to diethylstilbestrol (DES). This is a drug that was given to pregnant women in the 1960’s to help prevent miscarriage
3.Over-exposure of the uterine lining to ovarian male hormones (mainly testosterone): Older women, women with diminished ovarian reserve (poor responders) and women with polycystic ovarian syndrome -PCOS tend to have raised LH biological activity.. This causes the connective tissue in the ovary (stroma/theca) to overproduce testosterone. The effect can be further exaggerated when certain methods for ovarian stimulation such as agonist (Lupron/Buserelin) “flare” protocols and high dosages of menotropins such as Menopur are used in such cases.
4.Reduced blood flow to the basal endometrium:
Examples include;
a.Multiple uterine fibroids - especially when these are present under the endometrium (submucosal)
b.Uterine adenomyosis (excessive, abnormal invasion of the uterine muscle by endometrial glands).
“The Viagra Connection”
Eighteen years ago years ago, after reporting on the benefit of vaginal Sildenafil (Viagra) for to women who had implantation dysfunction due to thin endometrial linings I was proud to announce the birth of the world’s first “Viagra baby.” Since the introduction of this form of treatment, thousands of women with thin uterine linings have been reported treated and many have gone on to have babies after repeated prior IVF failure.
For those of you who aren’t familiar with the use of Viagra in IVF, allow me to provide some context. It was in the 90’s that Sildenafil (brand named Viagra) started gaining popularity as a treatment for erectile dysfunction. The mechanism by which it acted was through increasing penile blood flow through increasing nitric oxide activity. This prompted me to investigate whether Viagra administered vaginally, might similarly improve uterine blood flow and in the process cause more estrogen to be delivered to the basal endometrium and thereby increase endometrial thickening. We found that when Viagra was administered vaginally it did just that! However oral administration was without any significant benefit in this regard. We enlisted the services of a compound pharmacy to produce vaginal Viagra suppositories. Initially, four (4) women with chronic histories of poor endometrial development and failure to conceive following several advanced fertility treatments were evaluated for a period of 4-6 weeks and then underwent IVF with concomitant Viagra therapy. Viagra suppositories were administered four times daily for 8-11 days and were discontinued 5-7 days prior to embryo transfer in all cases.
Our findings clearly demonstrated that vaginal Viagra produced a rapid and profound improvement in uterine blood flow and that was followed by enhanced endometrial development in all four cases. Three (3) of the four women subsequently conceived. I expanded the trial in 2002 and became the first to report on the administration of vaginal Viagra to 105 women with repeated IVF failure due to persistently thin endometrial linings. All of the women had experienced at least two (2) prior IVF failures attributed to intractably thin uterine linings. About 70% of these women responded to treatment with Viagra suppositories with a marked improvement in endometrial thickness. Forty five percent (45%) achieved live births following a single cycle of IVF treatment with Viagra The miscarriage rate was 9%. None of the women who had failed to show an improvement in endometrial thickness following Viagra treatment achieved viable pregnancies.
Following vaginal administration, Viagra is rapidly absorbed and quickly reaches the uterine blood system in high concentrations. Thereupon it dilutes out as it is absorbed into the systemic circulation. This probably explains why treatment is virtually devoid of systemic side effects
It is important to recognize that Viagra will NOT be effective in improving endometrial thickness in all cases. In fact, about 30%-40% of women treated fail to show any improvement. This is because in certain cases of thin uterine linings, the basal endometrium will have been permanently damaged and left unresponsive to estrogen. This happens in cases of severe endometrial damage due mainly to post-pregnancy endometritis (inflammation), chronic granulomatous inflammation due to uterine tuberculosis (hardly ever seen in the United States) and following extensive surgical injury to the basal endometrium (as sometimes occurs following over-zealous D&C’s).
Combining vaginal Viagra Therapy with oral Terbutaline;
In my practice I sometimes recommend combining Viagra administration with 5mg of oral terbutaline. The Viagra relaxes the muscle walls of uterine spiral arteries that feed the basal (germinal) layer of the endometrium while Terbutaline, relaxes the uterine muscle through which these spiral arteries pass. The combination of these two medications interacts synergistically to maximally enhance blood flow through the uterus, thereby improving estrogen delivery to the endometrial lining. The only drawback in using Terbutaline is that some women experience agitation, tremors and palpitations. In such cases the terbutaline should be discontinued. Terbutaline should also not be used women who have cardiac disease or in those who have an irregular heartbeat.
About 75% of women with thin uterine linings see a positive response to treatment within 2-3 days. The ones that do not respond well to this treatment are those who have severely damaged inner (basal/germinal) endometrial linings, such that no improvement in uterine blood flow can coax an improved response. Such cases are most commonly the result of prior pregnancy-related endometrial inflammation (endometritis) that sometimes occurs post abortally or following infected vaginal and/or cesarean delivery.
Viagra therapy has proven to be a god send to thousands of woman who because of a thin uterine lining would otherwise never have been able to successfully complete the journey “from infertility to family”.
To be effective, Viagra must be administered vaginally. It is NOT effective when taken orally. We prescribe 20mg vaginal suppositories to be inserted four times per day. Treatment is commenced soon after menstruation ceases and is continued until the day of the “hCG trigger.” While ideally the treatment should be sustained throughout the first half of the cycle, most women will respond within 48-72 hours. For this reason, Viagra can be used to “rescue” a poor lining after the cycle has already started, provided that there is enough time remaining prior to ovulation, egg retrieval or progesterone administration.
Geoff Sher
Im a patient with PCOS, and long irregular cycles typically 60-64 days which are sometimes annovulatory. was just given provera to bring on a bleed due to lining getting too thick. On new cycke, day 4 ultrasound showed a solo follicle of 19.5mm and my estradiol was 153 pg/ml. The following day on CD5, the follicle measured about 20.5. However the estradiol has dropped to 130 pg/ml. When I got pregnant 2 years ago it was very early on in the cycke, similar to this after being prescribed Provera since st thet time I was found to be clomid resistant. My question is tbis possible to get pregnant from a residual Follicle possibly from my previous cycle? I was given Ovidrel 250 trigger shot on CD5. My lining was still very thin st only 4.5 mm, but when I got pregmant 2 years ago my lining was only slightly bigger at 5mm when they triggered. Provera could be doing something wierd to my body which causes residual eggs to ovulate. T Any thoughts here?
That would be highly unlikely to result in a pregnancy.
Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common hormonal system disorder among women affecting between 5% and 10% of women of reproductive age worldwide. Women with PCOS may have enlarged ovaries that contain multiple small collections of fluid (subcapsular microcysts) that are arranged like a “string of pearls” immediately below the ovarian surface (capsule).interspersed by an overgrowth of ovarian connective tissue (stroma). The condition is characterized by abnormal ovarian function (irregular or absent periods, abnormal or absent ovulation and infertility, androgenicity (increased body hair or hirsutism, acne) and increased body weight –body mass index or BMI.
Women with PCOS are at increased risk that ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins will result in the, of development of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), a life-endangering condition that is often accompanied by a profound reduction in egg “competency” and on fertilization often yield an inordinately high percentage of “incompetent” embryos which have a reduced potential to propagate viable pregnancies.
Concern and even fear that their PCOS patients will develop of OHSS often leads the treating RE to take measures aimed at reducing the risk of this life-endangering condition. One such measures is to “trigger” egg maturation prematurely in the hope of arresting further follicular growth and the other, is to initiate the “trigger” with a reduced dosage of hCG (i.ed. 5,000U rather than the usual 10,000U of of Pregnyl/Profasi/Novarel, to use or 250mcg rather than 500mcg of Ovidrel or to supplant the hCG “trigger” with a Lupron “trigger” which causes a prompt LH surge from the woman’s pituitary gland to take place. While such measures do indeed reduce the risk of OHSS to the mother, this often comes at the expense of egg quantity and “competency”. Fewer than the anticipated number of eggs are harvested and those that are retrieved are far more likely to be “immature” and chromosomally abnormal (aneuploid”), or “immature” , thereby significantly compromising IVF outcome.
Against this background, It is my considered opinion that when it comes to performing IVF in women with PCOS, the most important consideration must be the selection and proper implementation of an individualized or customized ovarian stimulation protocol. Thereupon, rather than prematurely initiating the “trigger” to arrest further follicle growth, administering a reduced dosage of hCG or “triggering with a GnRH agonist (e.g. Lupron/Buserelin) that can compromise egg “competency”….. use of one of the following techniques will often markedly reduce the risk of OHSS while at the same time protecting egg quality:
1. PROLONGED COASTING…my preferred approach: My preferred approach is to use a long pituitary down-regulation protocol coming off the BCP which during the last 3 days is overlapped with the agonist, Lupron/Buserelin/Superfact. The BCP is intended to lower LH and thereby reduce stromal activation (hyperthecosis) in the hope of controlling LH-induced ovarian androgen (predominantly, testosterone) production and release. I then stimulate my PCOS patients using a low dosage of recombinant FSH-(FSHr) such as Follistim/Gonal-F/Puregon. On the 3rd day of such stimulation a smidgeon of LH/hCG (Luveris/Menopur) is added. Thereupon, starting on day 7 of ovarian stimulation, I perform serial blood estradiol (E2) and ultrasound follicle assessments, watching for the number and size of the follicles and the blood estradiol concentration [E2]. I keep stimulating (regardless of the [E2] until 50% of all follicles reach 14mm. At this point, provided the [E2] reaches at least >2,500pg/ml, I stop the agonist as well as gonadotropin stimulation and track the blood E2 concentration daily. The [E2] will almost invariably increase for a few days. I closely monitor the [E2] as it rises, plateaus and then begins to decline. As soon as the [E2] drops below 2500pg/ml (and not before then), I administer a “trigger” shot of 10,000U Profasi/ Novarel/Pregnyl or 500mcg Ovidrel/Ovitrel. This is followed by an egg retrieval, performed 36 hours later. Fertilization is accomplished using intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) because “coasted” eggs usually have little or no cumulus oophoris enveloping them and eggs without a cumulus will not readily fertilize naturally. Moreover, they also tend to have a “hardened” envelopment (zona pellucida), making spontaneous fertilization problematic in many cases. All fertilized eggs are cultured to the blastocyst stage (up to day 5- 6 days) and thereupon are either vitrified and preserved for subsequent transfer in later hormone replacement cycles or (up to 2) blastocysts are transferred to the uterus, transvaginally under transabdominal ultrasound guidance. The success of this approach depends on precise timing of the initiation and conclusion of “prolonged coasting”. If started too early, follicle growth will arrest and the cycle will be lost. If commenced too late, too many follicles will be post-mature/cystic (>22mm) and as such will usually harbor abnormal or dysmature eggs. Use of “Coasting” almost always prevents the development of severe OHSS, optimizes egg/embryo quality and avoids unnecessary cycle cancellation. If correctly implemented, the worst you will encounter is moderate OHSS and this too is relatively uncommon.
2. EMBRYO FREEZING AND DEFERMENT OF EMBRYO TRANSFEDR (ET): OHSS is always a self-limiting condition. In the absence of continued exposure to hCG, symptoms and signs as well as the risk of severe complications will ultimately abate. Thus, in the absence of pregnancy, all symptoms, signs and risks associated with OHSS will disappear within about 10-14 days of the hCG trigger. Conversely, since early pregnancy is always accompanied by a rapid and progressive rise in hCG , the severity of OHSS will increase until about the 9th or tenth gestational week whereupon a transition from ovarian to placental hormonal dominance occurs, the severity of OHSS rapidly diminishes and the patient will be out of risk. Accordingly, in cases where in spite of best effort to prevent OHSS, the woman develops symptoms and signs of progressive overstimulation prior to planned ET, all the blastocysts should be vitrified and cryostored for FET in a subsequent hormone replacement cycle. In this way women with OHSS can be spared the risk of the condition spiraling out of control.
I strongly recommend that you visit http://www.DrGeoffreySherIVF.com . Then go to my Blog and access the “search bar”. Type in the titles of any/all of the articles listed below, one by one. “Click” and you will immediately be taken to those you select. Please also take the time to post any questions or comments with the full expectation that I will (as always) respond promptly.
·The IVF Journey: The importance of “Planning the Trip” Before Taking the Ride”
·Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) for IVF: Selecting the ideal protocol
·IVF: Factors Affecting Egg/Embryo “competency” during Controlled Ovarian Stimulation(COS)
·The Fundamental Requirements For Achieving Optimal IVF Success
·Use of GnRH Antagonists (Ganirelix/Cetrotide/Orgalutron) in IVF-Ovarian Stimulation Protocols.
·Anti Mullerian Hormone (AMH) Measurement to Assess Ovarian Reserve and Design the Optimal Protocol for Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in IVF.
·Egg Maturation in IVF: How Egg “Immaturity”, “Post-maturity” and “Dysmaturity” Influence IVF Outcome:
·Commonly Asked Question in IVF: “Why Did so Few of my Eggs Fertilize and, so Many Fail to Reach Blastocyst?”
·Human Growth Hormone Administration in IVF: Does it Enhances Egg/Embryo Quality and Outcome?
·The BCP: Does Launching a Cycle of Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS). Coming off the BCP Compromise Response?
·Taking A Fresh Look at Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome (OHSS), its Presentation, Prevention and Management
·Preventing Severe Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome (OHSS) with “Prolonged Coasting”
·Understanding Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS) and the Need to Customize Ovarian Stimulation Protocols.
·“Triggering” Egg Maturation in IVF: Comparing urine-derived hCG, Recombinant DNA-hCG and GnRH-agonist:
·The “Lupron Trigger” to Prevent Severe OHSS: What are the Pro’s and Con’s?
•.Frozen Embryo Transfer (FET) versus “Fresh” ET: How to Make the Decision
•Frozen Embryo Transfer (FET): A Rational Approach to Hormonal Preparation and How new Methodology is Impacting IVF.
•Implications of “Empty Follicle Syndrome and “Premature Luteinization”
•Premature Luteinization (“the premature LH surge): Why it happens and how it can be prevented.
•Preventing Severe Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome (OHSS) with “Prolonged Coasting”
If you are interested in my advice or medical services, I urge you to contact my patient concierge, ASAP to set up a Skype or an in-person consultation with me. You can also set this up by emailing concierge@sherivf.com or by calling 702-533-2691 and/or 800-780-743. You can also enroll for a consultation with me, online at http://www.SherIVF.com.
Also, my book, “In Vitro Fertilization, the ART of Making Babies” is available as a down-load through http://www.Amazon.com .
Geoffrey Sher MD
Hi Dr. Sher
Would you transfer an embryo with both a mosaic monosomy 13 and mosaic partial trisomy 21q21.3-qter?
Another embryo has both mosaic partial monosomy 7q22.3-qter and mosaic trisomy 18.
Thank You!
Another is mosaic partial monosomy 7q22.3-qter and
mosaic trisomy 18?
While others might differ, I personally would not recommend embryos with > 1 chromosomal aneuploidy!
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 my 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.”
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 normal (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 likely 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 reliably differentiate between these two varieties of aneuploidy would potentially be of considerable clinical value. The recent introduction of a variety of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) known as next generation gene sequencing (NGS) has vastly improved the ability to reliably and accurately karyotype embryos and thus to diagnose embryo “mosaicism”.
The ability of mosaic embryos to autocorrect is influenced by the stage at which the condition is diagnosed as well as the percentage of mosaic cells. Many embryos diagnosed as being mosaic while in the earlier cleaved state of development, subsequently undergo autocorrection to the euploid state (normal numerical chromosomal configuration) during the process of undergoing subsequent mitotic cell to the blastocyst stage. Similarly, mosaic blastocysts can also undergo autocorrection after being transferred to the uterus. The lower the percentage of mosaic cells in the blastocyst the greater the propensity to autocorrect and propagate chromosomally normal (euploid) offspring. By comparison, a blastocyst with 10% mosaicism could yield a 30% healthy baby rate with 10-15% miscarriage rate, while with >50% mosaicism the baby rate is roughly halved and the miscarriage rate double.
Aneuploidy involves the addition (trisomy) or subtraction (monosomy) of one or part of one chromosome in any 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 several pairs (i.e. complex aneuploidy). Aside from monosomy involving the absence of the y-sex chromosome (i.e. XO) which can result in a live birth (Turner syndrome) of a compromised baby, virtually all monosomies involving autosomes (non-sex chromosomes) are likely to be lethal and will rarely result in viable offspring. Some autosomal meiotic aneuploidies, especially trisomies 13, 18, 21, can propagate viable and severely chromosomally defective babies. 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 as stated, mitotic aneuploidy (“mosaicism) can autocorrect, yielding healthy offspring. Most complex aneuploidies are meiotic in origin and will thus almost invariably fail to propagate viable pregnancies.
Since certain “mosaic” meiotic aneuploid trisomy embryos (e.g. trisomies 13, 18, & 21) can potentially result in aneuploid concepti. For this reason, it is my opinion that 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 have them transferred to the uterus. Embryos harboring other autosomal mosaic trisomic embryos, should they not autocorrect in-utero will hardly ever produce a baby and as such there is hardly any risk at all…in transferring such embryos. However, it is my opinion that in the event of an ongoing pregnancy, amniocentesis or CVS should be performed to make certain that the baby is euploid. Conversely, when it comes to mosaic autosomal monosomy, given that virtually no autosomal monosomy embryos are likely to propagate viable pregnancies, the transfer of such mosaic embryos is virtually risk free. Needless to say, 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.
I strongly recommend that you visit http://www.SherIVF.com. Then go to my Blog and access the “search bar”. Type in the titles of any/all of the articles listed below, one by one. “Click” and you will immediately be taken to those you select. Please also take the time to post any questions or comments with the full expectation that I will (as always) respond promptly.
•A Fresh Look at the Indications for IVF
•The IVF Journey: The importance of “Planning the Trip” Before Taking the Ride”
•Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) for IVF: Selecting the ideal protocol
•IVF: Factors Affecting Egg/Embryo “competency” during Controlled Ovarian Stimulation(COS)
•The Fundamental Requirements For Achieving Optimal IVF Success
•Use of GnRH Antagonists (Ganirelix/Cetrotide/Orgalutron) in IVF-Ovarian Stimulation Protocols.
•Anti Mullerian Hormone (AMH) Measurement to Assess Ovarian Reserve and Design the Optimal Protocol for Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in IVF.
•Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in Older women and Women who have Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR): A Rational Basis for Selecting a Stimulation Protocol
•Optimizing Response to Ovarian Stimulation in Women with Compromised Ovarian Response to Ovarian Stimulation: A Personal Approach.
•Hereditary Clotting Defects (Thrombophilia)
•Blastocyst Embryo Transfers done 5-6 Days Following Fertilization are Fast Replacing Earlier day 2-3 Transfers of Cleaved Embryos.
•Embryo Transfer Procedure: The “Holy Grail in IVF.
•Timing of ET: Transferring Blastocysts on Day 5-6 Post-Fertilization, Rather Than on Day 2-3 as Cleaved Embryos.
•IVF: Approach to Selecting the Best Embryos for Transfer to the Uterus.
•Fresh versus Frozen Embryo Transfers (FET) Enhance IVF Outcome
•Frozen Embryo Transfer (FET): A Rational Approach to Hormonal Preparation and How new Methodology is Impacting IVF.
•Staggered IVF
•Staggered IVF with PGS- Selection of “Competent” Embryos Greatly Enhances the Utility & Efficiency of IVF.
•Staggered IVF: An Excellent Option When. Advancing Age and Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR) Reduces IVF Success Rate
•Embryo Banking/Stockpiling: Slows the “Biological Clock” and offers a Selective Alternative to IVF-Egg Donation
•Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGS) in IVF: It should be Used Selectively and NOT be Routine.
•IVF: Selecting the Best Quality Embryos to Transfer
•Preimplantation Genetic Sampling (PGS) Using: Next Generation Gene Sequencing (NGS): Method of Choice.
•PGS and Assessment of Egg/Embryo “competency”: How Method, Timing and Methodology Could Affect Reliability
•IVF outcome: How Does Advancing Age and Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR) Affect Egg/Embryo “Competency” and How Should the Problem be addressed.
If you are interested in my advice or medical services, I urge you to contact my patient concierge, ASAP to set up a Skype or an in-person consultation with me. You can also set this up by emailing concierge@sherivf.com or by calling 702-533-2691 and/or 800-780-743. You can also enroll for a consultation with me, online at http://www.SherIVF.com.
Also, my book, “In Vitro Fertilization, the ART of Making Babies” is available as a down-load through http://www.Amazon.com .
Geoffrey Sher MD
Hi Dr Sher,
I had left a comment earlier about my eggs “degenerating” during the freezing process and that I have a neuroendocrine cancer history. I realized I forgot to list the meds they had me on for the retrieval. My protocol was Gonal F, Low dose HCG, letrozole, and I was triggered with Lupron. Thank you.
In my opinion, this could well explain the result you had.
We should talk and I will explain further.
Geoff Sher
G
Hi Dr Sher,
My name is Danielle, I’m 30 years old and recently went through a cycle of IVF meds to freeze my eggs because of underlying health issues. I have a history of neuroendocrine cancer that is not of genetic origin. Mine occurred when I was 18 and was trigger by a Steven Johnson’s Syndrome reaction to a antibiotic I was given that I was allergic to. Before I started the egg retrieval process they ran some tests and my AMH was 2.6 and I had normal estradiol and FSH levels so there was no concern at the time that my egg quality was bad. However, On the day of retrieval, they collected 15 eggs but said they were unable to freeze any of them because when they were starting the freezing process, the eggs kept degenerating. My doctor said she and all the other doctors in the practice had never seen this before. I asked her if she knew what caused it and she said she wasn’t sure and would get back to me. That was about 2 weeks ago and I haven’t heard back yet. I’m planning on following up again this week. My question is, have you seen this before and do you think that this could have been caused from my underlying health issues/ egg quality or could it have been from the IVF meds or the freezing process?
It is possible that chemotherapy or radiotherapy for the cancer could have damaged your eggs. However, I am more inclined to believe that the stimulation protocol and/or its implementation cold have been a significant factor. I would however need to have a great deal more information to advise with more confidence, authoritatively.
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, and (in the case of cancer therapy) the impact of chemotherapy and radiotherapy on egg quality can never be ignored, 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) can obviate this effect
.I strongly recommend that you visit http://www.DrGeoffreySherIVF.com. Then go to my Blog and access the “search bar”. Type in the titles of any/all of the articles listed below, one by one. “Click” and you will immediately be taken to those you select. Please also take the time to post any questions or comments with the full expectation that I will (as always) respond promptly.
•The IVF Journey: The importance of “Planning the Trip” Before Taking the Ride”
•Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) for IVF: Selecting the ideal protocol
•The Fundamental Requirements For Achieving Optimal IVF Success
•Use of GnRH Antagonists (Ganirelix/Cetrotide/Orgalutron) in IVF-Ovarian Stimulation Protocols.
•Anti Mullerian Hormone (AMH) Measurement to Assess Ovarian Reserve and Design the Optimal Protocol for Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in IVF.
•The “Biological Clock” and how it should Influence the Selection and Design of Ovarian Stimulation Protocols for IVF.
• A Rational Basis for selecting Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) protocols in women with Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR)
•Diagnosing and Treating Infertility due to Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR)
•Ovarian Stimulation in Women Who have Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR): Introducing the Agonist/Antagonist Conversion protocol
•Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in Older women and Women who have Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR): A Rational Basis for Selecting a Stimulation Protocol
•Optimizing Response to Ovarian Stimulation in Women with Compromised Ovarian Response to Ovarian Stimulation: A Personal Approach.
•Egg Maturation in IVF: How Egg “Immaturity”, “Post-maturity” and “Dysmaturity” Influence IVF Outcome:
•Commonly Asked Question in IVF: “Why Did so Few of my Eggs Fertilize and, so Many Fail to Reach Blastocyst?”
•Human Growth Hormone Administration in IVF: Does it Enhances Egg/Embryo Quality and Outcome?
•The BCP: Does Launching a Cycle of Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS). Coming off the BCP Compromise Response?
•Staggered IVF
•Staggered IVF with PGS- Selection of “Competent” Embryos Greatly Enhances the Utility & Efficiency of IVF.
•Staggered IVF: An Excellent Option When. Advancing Age and Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR) Reduces IVF Success Rate
•Embryo Banking/Stockpiling: Slows the “Biological Clock” and offers a Selective Alternative to IVF-Egg Donation
•Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGS) in IVF: It should be Used Selectively and NOT be Routine.
•IVF: Selecting the Best Quality Embryos to Transfer
•Preimplantation Genetic Sampling (PGS) Using: Next Generation Gene Sequencing (NGS): Method of Choice.
•PGS in IVF: Are Some Chromosomally abnormal Embryos Capable of Resulting in Normal Babies and Being Wrongly Discarded?
•PGS and Assessment of Egg/Embryo “competency”: How Method, Timing and Methodology Could Affect Reliability
•IVF outcome: How Does Advancing Age and Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR) Affect Egg/Embryo “Competency” and How Should the Problem be addressed.
If you are interested in my advice or medical services, I urge you to contact my patient concierge, ASAP to set up a Skype or an in-person consultation with me. You can also set this up by emailing concierge@sherivf.com or by calling 702-533-2691 and/or 800-780-743. You can also enroll for a consultation with me, online at http://www.SherIVF.com.
Also, my book, “In Vitro Fertilization, the ART of Making Babies” is available as a down-load through http://www.Amazon.com .
Geoffrey Sher MD