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.

19,771 Comments

  1. Dear Dr. Sher,
    I am a 29-year old woman. Due to dysmenorhoea, my father (who is also a MD) suspected endometriosis already a year ago but this was contradicted by 2 gynaecologists. So we stopped with anticonception and started trying to conceive with high hopes. After 6 months of trying, I was pregnant but at 7 weeks, a blighted ovum was diagnosed. Misoprostol was subscribed to expel the foetus. After that, I had an MRI which did reveal deep endometriosis (sacro-uterine ligament, recto-sigmoid, rectovaginal). Luckily, there are no endometriomas on the ovaries and based on the hysteropscopy and MRI, the uterus looks fine without any adenomyosis. I was advised not to have surgery, but to start IVF, so we did. I had gonapeptyl and was stimulated with 150/187,5 dose Menopur for 12 days. In addition, I also tested slightly positive for APA (anticardiolipine IgG was 23 U/ml, cut off value is <20 U/ml). Homocystein was normal at 9 nmol/ml. For this, the fertility center prescribed low dose aspirin (80mg) and low dose steroids (prednisolone 10mg) that I take once a day starting from egg retrieval. My husband's sperm is superb. Result from IVF: I had 9 eggs, 7 fertilized (3/5 by IVF and 4/4 with ICSI). At day 5, I had only one 3AA embryo, which was transferred this morning, one 3CC embryo from the IVF group, the other embryo from the IVF group stopped developing at day 3. The 4 embryo's from the ICSI group, had not reached blastocyst stage this morning. We hope they would reach an AA stage by tomorrow. They were all behind, in the same stage. I am very worried about my embryo quality and terrified that if this one does not stick, I have no frozen embryo's, which I did not expect for my age. Is there anything else we can test or do?

    • I would like to add: my AMH value was 2.85 ng/ml

    • I fully comprehend your situation. I think I can be of substantive help here but we would need to talk (see below). Here is an explanation for how endometriosis impacts fertility and a broad outline of the approach needed.

      Endometriosis is a condition that occurs when the uterine lining (endometrium) grows not only in the interior of the uterus but in other areas, such as the fallopian tubes, ovaries and the bowel. Endometriosis is a complex condition where, the lack or relative absence of an overt anatomical barrier to fertility often belies the true extent of reproductive problem(s).

      All too often the view is expounded that the severity of endometriosis-related infertility is inevitably directly proportionate to the anatomical severity of the disease itself, thereby implying that endometriosis causes infertility primarily by virtue of creating anatomical barriers to fertilization. This over-simplistic and erroneous view is often used to support the performance of many unnecessary surgeries for the removal of small innocuous endometriotic lesions, on the basis of such “treatment” evoking an improvement in subsequent fertility.

      It is indisputable that even the mildest form of endometriosis can compromise fertility. It is equally true that, mild to moderate endometriosis is by no means a cause of absolute “sterility”.

      Rather, when compared with normally ovulating women of a similar age who do not have endometriosis, women with mild to moderate endometriosis are about four to six times less likely to have a successful pregnancy.

      Endometriosis often goes unnoticed for many years. Such patients are frequently, erroneously labeled as having “unexplained infertility”, until the diagnosis is finally clinched through direct visualization of the lesions at the time of laparoscopy or laparoscopy. Not surprisingly, many patients with so called “unexplained” infertility, if followed for a number of years, will ultimately reveal endometriosis.

      Women who have endometriosis are much more likely to be infertile. There are several reasons for this:

      •First-Ovulation Dysfunction: In about 25 – 30% of cases, endometriosis is associated with ovulation dysfunction. Treatment requires controlled ovarian stimulation (COS). The problem is that the toxic pelvic environment markedly reduces the likelihood that anything other than IVF will enhance pregnancy potential.
      •Second- Toxic Pelvic environment that compromises Fertilization Endometriosis is associated with the presence of toxins in peritoneal secretions while it is tempting to assert that normally ovulating women with mild to moderate endometriosis would have no difficulty in conceiving if their anatomical disease is addressed surgically or that endometriosis-related infertility is confined to cases with more severe anatomical disease…nothing could be further from the truth. The natural conception rate for healthy ovulating women in their early 30’s (who are free of endometriosis) is about 15% per month of trying and 70% per year of actively attempting to conceive. Conversely, the conception rate for women of a comparable age who have mild or moderate pelvic endometriosis (absent or limited anatomical disease) is about 5-6% per month and 40% after 3 years of trying. As sperm and egg(s) travel towards the fallopian tubes they are exposed to these toxins which compromise the fertilization process. In fact it has been estimated that there is a 5-6 fold reduction in fertilization potential because of these toxins which cannot be eradicated. Frankly, it really does not matter whether an attempt is made to remove endometriosis deposits surgically as this will not improve pregnancy potential. The reason is that for every deposit observed, there are numerous others that are in the process of developing and are not visible to the naked eye and whether visible or not, such translucent deposits still produce toxins. This also explains why surgery to remove visible endometriosis deposits, controlled ovarian stimulation with or without intrauterine insemination will usually not improve pregnancy potential. Only IVF, through removing eggs before they are exposed to the toxic pelvic environment, fertilizing them in-vitro and then transferring the embryos to the uterus represents the only way to enhance pregnancy potential.
      •Third-Pelvic adhesions and Scarring: In its most severe form, endometriosis is associated with scarring and adhesions in the pelvis, resulting in damage to, obstruction or fixation of the fallopian tubes to surrounding structures, thereby preventing the union of sperm and eggs.
      •Fourth-Ovarian Endometriomas, Advanced endometriosis is often associated with ovarian cysts (endometriomas/chocolate cysts) that are filled with altered blood and can be large and multiple. When these are sizable (>1cm) they can activate surrounding ovarian connective tissue causing production of excessive male hormones (androgens) such as testosterone and androstenedione. Excessive ovarian androgens can compromise egg development in the affected ovary (ies) resulting in an increased likelihood of numerical chromosomal abnormalities (aneuploidy) and reduced egg/embryo competency”. In my opinion large ovarian endometriomas need to be removed surgically or rough sclerotherapy before embarking on IVF.
      •Fifth- Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID). Endometriosis, regardless of its severity is associated with immunologic implantation dysfunction linked to activation of uterine natural killer cells (NKa) and cytotoxic uterine lymphocytes (CTL) in about 30 of cases. This is diagnosed by testing the woman’s blood for NKa using the K-562 target cell test or by endometrial biopsy for cytokine analysis, and, for CTL by doing a blood immunophenotype. These NKa attack the invading trophoblast cells (developing “root system” of the embryo/early conceptus) as soon as it tries to gain attachment to the uterine wall. In most cases, this results in death of the embryo even before the pregnancy is diagnosed and sometimes, in a chemical pregnancy or even an early miscarriage. . As such, many women with endometriosis, rather than being infertile, in the strict sense of the word, often actually experience repeated undetected “mini-miscarriages”.

      Advanced Endometriosis: In its most advanced stage, anatomical disfiguration is causally linked to the infertility. In such cases, inspection at laparoscopy or laparoscopy will usually reveal severe pelvic adhesions, scarring and “chocolate cysts”. However, the quality of life of patients with advanced endometriosis is usually so severely compromised by pain and discomfort, that having a baby is often low on the priority list. Accordingly, such patients are usually often more interested in relatively radical medical and surgical treatment options (might preclude a subsequent pregnancy), such as removal of ovaries, fallopian pubis and even the uterus, as a means of alleviating suffering.

      Moderately Severe Endometriosis. These patients have a modest amount of scarring/ adhesions and endometriotic deposits which are usually detected on the ovaries, fallopian tubes, bladder surface and low in the pelvis, behind the uterus. In such cases, the fallopian tubes are usually opened and functional.

      Mild Endometriosis: These patients who at laparoscopy or laparotomy are found to have no significant distortion of pelvic anatomy are often erroneously labeled as having “unexplained” infertility. To hold that the there can only infertility can only be attributed to endometriosis if significant anatomical disease can be identified, is to ignore the fact that, biochemical, hormonal and immunological factors profoundly impact fertility. Failure to recognize this salient fact continues to play havoc with the hopes and dreams of many infertile endometriosis patients.

      TREATMENT:
      The following basic concepts apply to management of endometriosis-related infertility:

      1.Controlled Ovulation stimulation (COS) with/without intrauterine insemination (IUI): Toxins in the peritoneal secretions of women with endometriosis exert a negative effect on fertilization potential regardless of how sperm reaches the fallopian tubes. This helps explain why COS with or without IUI will usually not improve the chances of pregnancy (over no treatment at all) in women with endometriosis. IVF is the only way by which to bypass this problem.
      2.Laparoscopy or Laparotomy Surgery aimed at restoring the anatomical integrity of the fallopian tubes does not counter the negative influence of toxic peritoneal factors that inherently reduce the chances of conception in women with endometriosis four to six fold. Nor does it address the immunologic implantation dysfunction (IID) commonly associated with this condition. Pelvic surgery is relatively contraindicated for the treatment of infertility associated with endometriosis, when the woman is more than 35 years of age. With the pre-menopause approaching, such women do not have the time to waste on such less efficacious alternatives. In contrast, younger women who have time on their side might consider surgery as a viable option. Approximately 30 -40 percent of women under 35 years of age with endometriosis will conceive with in two to three years following corrective pelvic surgery.
      3.Sclerotherapy for ovarian endometriomas (“chocolate” cysts). About 15 years ago I introduced “sclerotherapy”, a relatively non-invasive, safe and effective outpatient method to permanently eliminate endometriomas without surgery being required. Sclerotherapy for ovarian endometriomas involves needle aspiration of the liquid content of the endometriotic cyst, followed by the injection of 5% tetracycline into the cyst cavity. Treatment results in disappearance of the lesion within 6-8 weeks, in more than 75% of cases so treated. Ovarian sclerotherapy can be performed under local anesthesia or under general anesthesia. It has the advantage of being an ambulatory office- based procedure, at low cost, with a low incidence of significant post-procedural pain or complications and the avoidance of the need for laparoscopy or laparotomy
      4.The role of selective immunotherapy More than half of women who have endometriosis harbor antiphospholipid antibodies (APA) that can compromise development of the embryo’s root system (trophoblast). In addition and far more serious, is the fact that in about one third of cases endometriosis, regardless of its severity is associated with NKa and cytotoxic uterine lymphocytes (CTL) which can seriously jeopardize implantation. This immunologic implantation dysfunction (IID) is diagnosed by testing the woman’s blood for APA, for NKa (using the K-562 target cell test or by endometrial biopsy for cytokine activity) and, for CTL (by a blood immunophenotype). Activated NK cells attack the invading trophoblast cells (developing “root system” of the embryo/early conceptus) as soon as it tries to gain attachment to the uterine wall. In most cases, this results in rejection of the embryo even before the pregnancy is diagnosed and sometimes, in a chemical pregnancy or an early miscarriage. . As such, many women with endometriosis, rather than being infertile, in the strict sense of the word, often actually experience repeated undetected “mini-miscarriages”.

      Women who harbor APA’s often experience improved IVF birth rates when heparinoids (Clexane/Lovenox) are administered from the onset of ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins until the 10th week of pregnancy. NKa is treated with a combination of Intralipid (IL) and steroid therapy: Intralipid (IL) is a solution of small lipid droplets suspended in water. When administered intravenously, IL provides essential fatty acids, linoleic acid (LA), an omega-6 fatty acid, alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), an omega-3 fatty acid.IL is made up of 20% soybean oil/fatty acids (comprising linoleic acid, oleic acid, palmitic acid, linolenic acid and stearic acid) , 1.2% egg yolk phospholipids (1.2%), glycerin (2.25%) and water (76.5%).IL exerts a modulating effect on certain immune cellular mechanisms largely by down-regulating NKa.

      The therapeutic effect of IL/steroid therapy is likely due to an ability to suppress pro-inflammatory cellular (Type-1) cytokines such as interferon gamma and TNF-alpha. IL/steroids down-regulates NKa within 2-3 weeks of treatment the vast majority of women experiencing immunologic implantation dysfunction. In this regard IL is just as effective as Intravenous Gamma globulin (IVIg) but at a fraction of the cost and with a far lower incidence of side-effects. Its effect lasts for 4-9 weeks when administered in early pregnancy.

      5.The role of IVF: The toxic pelvic environment caused by endometriosis, profoundly reduces natural fertilization potential. As a result normally ovulating infertile women with endometriosis and patent Fallopian tubes are much less likely to conceive naturally, or by using fertility agents alone (with or without intrauterine (IUI) insemination. The only effective way to bypass this adverse pelvic environment is through IVF. I am not suggesting here that all women who have endometriosis require IVF! Rather, I am saying that in cases where the condition is further compromised by an IID associated with NKa and/or for older women(over 35y) who have diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) where time is of the essence, it is my opinion that IVF is the treatment of choice.

      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.
      •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:
      •The Role of Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID) & Infertility (IID): PART 1-Background
      •Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID) & Infertility (IID): PART 2- Making a Diagnosis
      •Immunologic Dysfunction (IID) & Infertility (IID): PART 3-Treatment
      •Thyroid autoantibodies and Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID)
      •Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction: Importance of Meticulous Evaluation and Strategic Management 🙁 Case Report)
      •Intralipid and IVIG therapy: Understanding the Basis for its use in the Treatment of Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID)
      •Intralipid (IL) Administration in IVF: It’s Composition; hHow it Works; Administration; Side-effects; Reactions and Precautions
      •Natural Killer Cell Activation (NKa) and Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction in IVF: The Controversy!
      •Treating Out-of-State and Out-of-Country Patients at Sher-IVF in Las Vegas
      •Should IVF Treatment Cycles be provided uninterrupted or be Conducted in 7-12 Pre-scheduled “Batches” per Year
      •A personalized, stepwise approach to IVF
      •How Many Embryos should be transferred: A Critical Decision in IVF.
      •Endometriosis and Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID) and IVF
      •Endometriosis and Infertility: Why IVF Rather than IUI or Surgery Should be the Treatment of Choice.
      •Endometriosis and Infertility: The Influence of Age and Severity on Treatment Options
      •Early -Endometriosis-related Infertility: Ovulation Induction (with or without Intrauterine Insemination-IUI) and Reproductive Surgery Versus IVF
      •Treating Ovarian Endometriomas with Sclerotherapy.
      •Effect of Advanced Endometriosis with Endometriotic cysts (Endometriomas) on IVF Outcome & Treatment Options.
      •Deciding Between Intrauterine Insemination (IUI) and In Vitro Fertilization (IVF).
      •Intrauterine Insemination (IUI): Who Needs it & who Does Not: Pro’s &
      •Induction of Ovulation with Clomiphene Citrate: Mode of Action, Indications, Benefits, Limitations and Contraindications for its use
      •Clomiphene Induction of Ovulation: Its Use and Misuse!
      ___________________________________________________________
      ADDENDUM:
      INTRODUCING SHER FRERTILITY SOLUTIONS (SFS)
      Hitherto I have personally performed the actual hands-on treatment of all patients who, seeking my involvement, elected to travel to Las Vegas for my care. However, with the launching of Sher-Fertility Solutions (SFS), I will as of March 31st take on a new and expanded consultation role. Rather than having hands-on involvement with IVF procedures I will, through SFS, instead provide fertility consultations (via SKYPE) to the growing number of patients (from >40 countries) with complex Reproductive Dysfunction (RD) who seek access to my input , advice and guidance. In this way I will be able to be involved in overseeing the care, of numerous patients who previously, because they were unable to travel long distances to be treated by me, were unable to gain access to my input.

      Anyone wishing to schedule a Skype consultation with me, can do so by: Calling my concierge (Patti Converse) at 1-800-780-7437 for an appointment,enrolling online on my website, http://www.SherIVF.com, or 702-533-2691; or emailing Patti at concierge@SherIVF.com or . sher@sherivf.com .
      I was very recently greatly honored in receiving an award by the prestigious; International Association of Top Professionals (IAOTP). For more information, go to the press release on my website, http://www.sherIVF.com .

      PLEASE HELP SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT SFS!

      Geoff Sher

  2. Greetings Dr. Sher,
    I have a 4 year old son from IVF, where my problem was endometriosis, and my husband had very poor morphology. Fast forward to now, we ve been trying for a second child, both naturally and through 2 KET’s of the frozen embies we had from the first IVF, but no success. After doctors did their bloodwork and sperm check they claim my endometriosis is gone, and my husband morphology is good now, and he can even be a donor at this point.
    So in these last 2 years we ve been trying to get pregnant again, its always the same thing. Every couple of months I get pregnant, start feeling symptoms (as I did very early on with my son too), one or two tests come out positive and then around my period the symptoms go away and period of course comes. Same pattern happened with the 2 KET’s we had. So even though Im seemingly healthier now than I was with my son, and so is my husband, now I keep having these chemicals.
    Any advice on why this could be happening, or maybe which further testing to do would be much appreciated. If I couldnt get pregnant it would be somehow easier to make my peace with it, but this kind of “teasing” I get every few months is simply heartbreaking.
    Thank You in advance for your thoughts and suggestions,

    Katarina

    • It seems to me that you have developed a probable endometriosis-related implantation dysfunction…probably immunologic in nature. I think you might benefit from a discussion with me (see below).

      More than half of women who have endometriosis harbor antiphospholipid antibodies (APA) that can compromise development of the embryo’s root system (trophoblast). In addition and far more serious, is the fact that in about one third of cases endometriosis, regardless of its severity is associated with uterine natural killer cell activation (Nka) and cytotoxic uterine lymphocytes (CTL) which can seriously jeopardize implantation. This immunologic implantation dysfunction (IID) is diagnosed by testing blood for APA, for NKa (using the K-562 target cell test or by endometrial biopsy for cytokine activity) and, for CTL (by a blood immunophenotype). NKa cells attack the invading trophoblast cells (developing “root system” of the embryo/early conceptus) as soon as it tries to gain attachment to the uterine wall. In most cases, this results in rejection of the embryo even before the pregnancy is diagnosed and sometimes, in a chemical pregnancy or an early miscarriage. As such, many women with endometriosis, rather than being infertile, in the strict sense of the word, often actually experience repeated undetected “mini-miscarriages”.

      Women who harbor APA’s often experience improved IVF birth rates when heparinoids (Clexane/Lovenox) are administered from the onset of ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins until the 10th week of pregnancy. NKa is treated with a combination of Intralipid (IL) and steroid therapy: Intralipid (IL) is a solution of small lipid droplets suspended in water. When administered intravenously, IL provides essential fatty acids, linoleic acid (LA), an omega-6 fatty acid, alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), an omega-3 fatty acid.IL is made up of 20% soybean oil/fatty acids (comprising linoleic acid, oleic acid, palmitic acid, linolenic acid and stearic acid) , 1.2% egg yolk phospholipids (1.2%), glycerin (2.25%) and water (76.5%).IL exerts a modulating effect on certain immune cellular mechanisms largely by down-regulating NKa.

      The therapeutic effect of IL/steroid therapy is likely due to an ability to suppress pro-inflammatory cellular (Type-1) cytokines such as interferon gamma and TNF-alpha. IL/steroids down-regulates NKa within 2-3 weeks of treatment the vast majority of women experiencing immunologic implantation dysfunction. In this regard IL is just as effective as Intravenous Gamma globulin (IVIg) but at a fraction of the cost and with a far lower incidence of side-effects. Its effect lasts for 4-9 weeks when administered in early pregnancy.

      The toxic pelvic environment caused by endometriosis, profoundly reduces natural fertilization potential. As a result normally ovulating infertile women with endometriosis and patent Fallopian tubes are much less likely to conceive naturally, or by using fertility agents alone (with or without intrauterine (IUI) insemination. The only effective way to bypass this adverse pelvic environment is through IVF. I am not suggesting here that all women who have endometriosis require IVF! Rather, I am saying that in cases where the condition is further compromised by an IID associated with NKa and/or for older women(over 35y) who have diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) where time is of the essence, it is my opinion that IVF is the treatment of choice.

      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.
      •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:
      •The Role of Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID) & Infertility (IID): PART 1-Background
      •Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID) & Infertility (IID): PART 2- Making a Diagnosis
      •Immunologic Dysfunction (IID) & Infertility (IID): PART 3-Treatment
      •Thyroid autoantibodies and Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID)
      •Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction: Importance of Meticulous Evaluation and Strategic Management 🙁 Case Report)
      •Intralipid and IVIG therapy: Understanding the Basis for its use in the Treatment of Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID)
      •Intralipid (IL) Administration in IVF: It’s Composition; how it Works; Administration; Side-effects; Reactions and Precautions
      •Natural Killer Cell Activation (NKa) and Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction in IVF: The Controversy!
      •Treating Out-of-State and Out-of-Country Patients at Sher-IVF in Las Vegas
      •Should IVF Treatment Cycles be provided uninterrupted or be Conducted in 7-12 Pre-scheduled “Batches” per Year
      •A personalized, stepwise approach to IVF
      •How Many Embryos should be transferred: A Critical Decision in IVF?
      •Endometriosis and Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID) and IVF
      •Endometriosis and Infertility: Why IVF Rather than IUI or Surgery Should be the Treatment of Choice.
      •Endometriosis and Infertility: The Influence of Age and Severity on Treatment Options
      •Early -Endometriosis-related Infertility: Ovulation Induction (with or without Intrauterine Insemination-IUI) and Reproductive Surgery Versus IVF
      •Treating Ovarian Endometriomas with Sclerotherapy.
      •Effect of Advanced Endometriosis with Endometriotic cysts (Endometriomas) on IVF Outcome & Treatment Options.
      •Deciding Between Intrauterine Insemination (IUI) and In Vitro Fertilization (IVF).
      •Intrauterine Insemination (IUI): Who Needs it & who Does Not: Pro’s &
      •Induction of Ovulation with Clomiphene Citrate: Mode of Action, Indications, Benefits, Limitations and Contraindications for its use
      •Clomiphene Induction of Ovulation: Its Use and Misuse!

      Geoff Sher
      ____________________________________________________________
      ADDENDUM:

      Sher-Fertility Solutions (SFS) will be officially launched in April 2019. Through SFS I will provide fertility consultations (via SKYPE) to an ever-growing number of patients (from >40 countries) with complex Reproductive Dysfunction (RD) who seek access to my input and guidance.

      In the past, I have limited my consultations with patients from afar to those who expressed a willingness to travel to Las Vegas for treatment by me. But now with the “birth” of SFS, all this is about to change. With one notable exception I will, as of April, 2019, no longer be conducting and performing hands-on IVF treatments. Rather, I will focus on providing SKYPE consultations and guidance to as many patients as possible. The one important exception will apply to approximately 1,000 existing patients who, following IVF previously performed by me, have remaining eggs or embryos stored (cryopreserved) at SIRM-LV and wish for me to perform their Frozen Embryo Transfers (FETs). I have agreed to accommodate such patients…..but only through August, 2019.

      Patients will have ready access online, to SFS: by going to http://www.SherIVF.com; by phone (1-800-780-7437 or 702-533-2691) and via email (sher@sherivf.com or concierge@sherIVF.com). A onetime fee of $400.00, will provide enrollees with access to: a full review of all their medical records (+ assistance in requisitioning additional records, as needed); a comprehensive initial 1 hour, SKYPE consultation with me; additional SKYPE consultations (as might be required); a written medical report (which will include a recommended plan of action) that you can share with a Physician(s) of choice. I would, subject to your approval and a request by such Physician(s), also be willing to discuss your case with him/her/them. I will in due course post on my website, a list of Fertility Physicians in key locations all over the United States and abroad, whom I endorse and to whom I would be willing to direct SFS patients for subsequent treatment.

      I have good news for those of you who are interested in traveling to Las Vegas for IVF. Dr Russel Foulk, Medical Director of SIRM-LV has expressed a willingness to be receptive to, treatment plans that I recommend for SFS patients Moreover, Dr Foulk has graciously agreed to interact with me during such treatments. I highly recommend Dr Foulk to those of you who, following consultation with me, wish to have me remain involved in the implementation of your treatment. This having been said, the final say in any management decision is always up to the treating physician.

      It is both my objective and commitment to serve as a resource to SFS patients on complex RD issues such as: Unexplained IVF failure; Recurrent Pregnancy loss (RPL); Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction-IID; Genetic/chromosomal issues; effects of Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR) and advancing age on reproductive performance, etc.

      I hope to ultimately expand the National and International reach of SFS, through my website (www.sherIVF.com) , through online webinars as well as Town hall- type consumer-based seminars, workshops and through social media. At the same time I will continue blogging on my website and doing bi-weekly Live-feed Facebook presentations (at “Dr Geoffrey Sher”) on a variety of subjects and topical issues.

      For me this is a very exciting venture. Please become part of the SFS family and help spread the word!

      I was very recently greatly honored in receiving an award by the prestigious; International Association of Top Professionals (IAOTP). For more information, go to the press release on my website, http://www.sherIVF.com .

  3. hi dr,

    i have the only mosaic chromosome 21 loss embryo post pgs testing (25%). may i know your suggestion if i should transfer it?

    • Yes! I would transfer it.

      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.

      Many 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, growing evidence suggests that following embryo transfer, some aneuploid embryos will in the process of ongoing development, convert to the euploid state (i.e. “autocorrect”) and then go on to develop into chromosomally normal offspring. In fact, I am personally aware of several such cases having occurred in my own practice. 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 (“Mosaicism”) 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”.

      Most complex aneuploidies are meiotic in origin and will thus almost invariably fail to propagate viable pregnancies. The ability of mosaic embryos to autocorrect is influenced by stage of embryo development in which the diagnosis is made, which chromosomes are affected, whether the aneuploidy involves a single chromosome (simple) or involves 3 or more chromosomes (complex), and the percentage of cells that are aneuploid. Many embryos diagnosed as being mosaic prior to their development into blastocysts (in the cleaved state), subsequently undergo autocorrection to the euploid state (normal numerical chromosomal configuration) as they develop to blastocysts in the Petri dish. This is one reason why “mosaicism” is more commonly detected in early embryos than in blastocysts. Embryos with segmental mosaic aneuploidies, i.e. the addition (duplication) or subtraction (deletion), are also more likely to autocorrect. Finally, the lower the percentage of mitotically aneuploid (mosaic) cells in the blastocyst the greater the propensity for autocorrection and propagation of chromosomally normal (euploid) offspring. A blastocyst with <30% mosaicism could yield a 30% likelihood of a healthy baby rate with 10-15% miscarriage rate, while with >50% mosaicism the baby rate is roughly halved and the miscarriage rate double.

      As stated, the transfer of embryos with autosomal meiotic trisomy, will invariably result in failed implantation, early miscarriage or the birth of a defective child. Those with autosomal mitotic (“mosaic”) trisomies, while having the ability to autocorrect in-utero and result in the birth of a healthy baby can, depending on the percentage of mosaic (mitotically aneuploid) cells present, the number of aneuploid chromosomes and the type of mosaicism (single or segmental) either autocorrect and propagate a normal baby, result in failed implantation, miscarry or cause a birth defect (especially with trisomies 13, 18 or 21). This is why when it comes to giving consideration to transferring trisomic embryos, suspected of being “mosaic”, I advise patients to undergo prenatal genetic testing once pregnant and to be willing to undergo termination of pregnancy in the event of the baby being affected. Conversely, when it comes to meiotic autosomal monosomy, there is almost no chance of a viable pregnancy. in most cases implantation will fail to occur and if it does, the pregnancy will with rare exceptions, miscarry. “Mosaic” (mitotically aneuploid) autosomally monosomic embryos where a chromosome is missing), can and often will “autocorrect” in-utero and propagate a viable pregnancy. It is for this reason that I readily recommend the transfer of such embryos, while still (for safety sake) advising prenatal genetic testing in the event that a pregnancy results.

      Given our ability to recognize “mosaicism” through karyotyping of embryos, the question arrases as to which “mosaic” embryos are capable of auto-correcting in-utero and propagating viable pregnancies. Research suggests that that virtually no autosomal monosomy embryos will propagate viable pregnancies. Thus, the transfer of such mosaic embryos is virtually risk free. Needless to say however, in any such cases, it is 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.

      ___________________________________________________________
      ADDENDUM:
      INTRODUCING SHER FRERTILITY SOLUTIONS (SFS)
      Hitherto I have personally performed the actual hands-on treatment of all patients who, seeking my involvement, elected to travel to Las Vegas for my care. However, with the launching of Sher-Fertility Solutions (SFS), I will as of March 31st take on a new and expanded consultation role. Rather than having hands-on involvement with IVF procedures I will, through SFS, instead provide fertility consultations (via SKYPE) to the growing number of patients (from >40 countries) with complex Reproductive Dysfunction (RD) who seek access to my input , advice and guidance. In this way I will be able to be involved in overseeing the care, of numerous patients who previously, because they were unable to travel long distances to be treated by me, were unable to gain access to my input.

      Anyone wishing to schedule a Skype consultation with me, can do so by: Calling my concierge (Patti Converse) at 1-800-780-7437 for an appointment,enrolling online on my website, http://www.SherIVF.com, or 702-533-2691; or emailing Patti at concierge@SherIVF.com or . sher@sherivf.com .
      I was very recently greatly honored in receiving an award by the prestigious; International Association of Top Professionals (IAOTP). For more information, go to the press release on my website, http://www.sherIVF.com .

      PLEASE HELP SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT SFS!

      Geoff Sher

  4. Hi Dr. Sher,
    I am currently pregnant from IVF. I am 26 weeks. I am writing to ask your opinion on 2 subjects. First, I have been having almost weekly sonograms since becoming pregnant due to being AMA and high risk. I am now reading that sonograms could be dangerous and cause autism potentially? I’m horrified to read this and wondering what damage I have done. Second, I have MFTHR and have been on Metanx since concieving. I recently had my folate level tested and it was off the charts high. I just read that high folate in pregnancy has been linked to a much higher rate of autism. I feel like I can’t win here. Why would my doctor be pushing things that are not safe for my baby? I’m so stressed out now thinking I have done wrong by my baby. I have been reading your blog for years and would love to hear your opinion on these controversial issues. Thanks

    • To be very candid, I do not believe thee is any substantive evidence to support either of these concerns.

      Congratulations and good luck!

      Geoff Sher

  5. Hi Dr, would you transfer this embryo
    with partial monosomy 6q23.2-qter?

    • Yes I would! But discuss with your RE.

      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.

      Many 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, growing evidence suggests that following embryo transfer, some aneuploid embryos will in the process of ongoing development, convert to the euploid state (i.e. “autocorrect”) and then go on to develop into chromosomally normal offspring. In fact, I am personally aware of several such cases having occurred in my own practice. 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 (“Mosaicism”) 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”.

      Most complex aneuploidies are meiotic in origin and will thus almost invariably fail to propagate viable pregnancies. The ability of mosaic embryos to autocorrect is influenced by stage of embryo development in which the diagnosis is made, which chromosomes are affected, whether the aneuploidy involves a single chromosome (simple) or involves 3 or more chromosomes (complex), and the percentage of cells that are aneuploid. Many embryos diagnosed as being mosaic prior to their development into blastocysts (in the cleaved state), subsequently undergo autocorrection to the euploid state (normal numerical chromosomal configuration) as they develop to blastocysts in the Petri dish. This is one reason why “mosaicism” is more commonly detected in early embryos than in blastocysts. Embryos with segmental mosaic aneuploidies, i.e. the addition (duplication) or subtraction (deletion), are also more likely to autocorrect. Finally, the lower the percentage of mitotically aneuploid (mosaic) cells in the blastocyst the greater the propensity for autocorrection and propagation of chromosomally normal (euploid) offspring. A blastocyst with <30% mosaicism could yield a 30% likelihood of a healthy baby rate with 10-15% miscarriage rate, while with >50% mosaicism the baby rate is roughly halved and the miscarriage rate double.

      As stated, the transfer of embryos with autosomal meiotic trisomy, will invariably result in failed implantation, early miscarriage or the birth of a defective child. Those with autosomal mitotic (“mosaic”) trisomies, while having the ability to autocorrect in-utero and result in the birth of a healthy baby can, depending on the percentage of mosaic (mitotically aneuploid) cells present, the number of aneuploid chromosomes and the type of mosaicism (single or segmental) either autocorrect and propagate a normal baby, result in failed implantation, miscarry or cause a birth defect (especially with trisomies 13, 18 or 21). This is why when it comes to giving consideration to transferring trisomic embryos, suspected of being “mosaic”, I advise patients to undergo prenatal genetic testing once pregnant and to be willing to undergo termination of pregnancy in the event of the baby being affected. Conversely, when it comes to meiotic autosomal monosomy, there is almost no chance of a viable pregnancy. in most cases implantation will fail to occur and if it does, the pregnancy will with rare exceptions, miscarry. “Mosaic” (mitotically aneuploid) autosomally monosomic embryos where a chromosome is missing), can and often will “autocorrect” in-utero and propagate a viable pregnancy. It is for this reason that I readily recommend the transfer of such embryos, while still (for safety sake) advising prenatal genetic testing in the event that a pregnancy results.

      Given our ability to recognize “mosaicism” through karyotyping of embryos, the question arrases as to which “mosaic” embryos are capable of auto-correcting in-utero and propagating viable pregnancies. Research suggests that that virtually no autosomal monosomy embryos will propagate viable pregnancies. Thus, the transfer of such mosaic embryos is virtually risk free. Needless to say however, in any such cases, it is 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.

      ___________________________________________________________
      ADDENDUM:
      INTRODUCING SHER FRERTILITY SOLUTIONS (SFS)
      Hitherto I have personally performed the actual hands-on treatment of all patients who, seeking my involvement, elected to travel to Las Vegas for my care. However, with the launching of Sher-Fertility Solutions (SFS), I will as of March 31st take on a new and expanded consultation role. Rather than having hands-on involvement with IVF procedures I will, through SFS, instead provide fertility consultations (via SKYPE) to the growing number of patients (from >40 countries) with complex Reproductive Dysfunction (RD) who seek access to my input , advice and guidance. In this way I will be able to be involved in overseeing the care, of numerous patients who previously, because they were unable to travel long distances to be treated by me, were unable to gain access to my input.

      Anyone wishing to schedule a Skype consultation with me, can do so by: Calling my concierge (Patti Converse) at 1-800-780-7437 for an appointment,enrolling online on my website, http://www.SherIVF.com, or 702-533-2691; or emailing Patti at concierge@SherIVF.com or . sher@sherivf.com .
      I was very recently greatly honored in receiving an award by the prestigious; International Association of Top Professionals (IAOTP). For more information, go to the press release on my website, http://www.sherIVF.com .

      PLEASE HELP SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT SFS!

      Geoff Sher