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.
Hi Dr. Sher,
I am a 37 year old who has been trying to conceive since 2007. Sometimes I feel like the queen of “normal” because testing as revealed little out of the ordinary. I do have mild PCOS (I still have very regular cycles) and stage 1 endometriosis. Sperm analysis was normal. Blood levels have all been normal and I have a “beautiful uterus” and tubes. I stimulated well on Femera and Clomid. We were unable to achieve pregnancy on our own until December 2015 (after a mock transfer in preparation for IVF) which ended at 9 weeks (Trisomy 18). After this we did two egg retrievals which netted us 11 frozen embryos which we had PGS tested. All but two were normal (one was inconclusive). We have since done four transfers of normal embryos.
Transfer 1- Transfer 1 embryo, it split in two, resulted in two blighted ovums discovered at 7 weeks
Transfer 2- Transfer 1 embryo, implanted, resulted in blighted ovum discovered at 7 weeks
Transfer 3- Transfer 2 embryos, both implanted, loss at 8 weeks
Testing was done to see if the lining would be more receptive on a different day for transfer. Transfers were now set for Day 7.
Transfer 4- Transfer 2 embryos, one implanted, pregnancy progressed with bleeding, at 12.5 week scan it was noted there were cranial issues. Acrania confirmed at 14 weeks (baby was missing 60% of skull) resulting in heartbreaking elective termination.
We have two PGS normal embryos left. My doctor suggested not using them and looking into donor sperm/egg/embryo (the easiest and cheapest of which would be sperm). BUT I’m not convinced that I’m not the issue and I don’t want to “invest” in another process that will just trigger the same problems if my body can’t stay pregnant. We have done full karyotyping of ourselves (normal) and Counsel screening (not carriers for anything). I do not have the MTHFR gene. I am overweight but I have been tested for thyroid and diabetes (both well within healthy range).
I have an appointment with a reproductive immunologist, but I was wondering what your opinion would be in this case. Is there a specific test I should request? Should we abandon our frozen embryos in favor of donors? Any advice would be very much appreciated!
Hello Doctor Sher,
I had 2 frozen embryo transferred on May 20th, and was tested for HCG level on May 29th and the result was 33mIU/mL. I was tested again this morning, and the result came back 66 mIU/mL. In your experience, is this result not decent enough for an ongoing pregnancy?
Thank you Doctor,
Wendy Lei
I think you have a good chance!
Good luck!
Geoff Sher
Hi Doctor Sher,
We tested again this morning and only hcg is only 86. any thoughts?
Thanks,
Dr. Sher,
I am 37 years old and had two successful pregnancies (youngest is 8 years old). I am now with a different partner (33 years old) and within the past 6 months I have had two consecutive miscarriages (4 weeks (no heartbeat) and 7 weeks (heartbeat detected). Can you please recommend what my next course of action should be.
I am 34 years old, and have a three year old boy. I have had three miscarriages in the last 9 months. The first, made it to 13 weeks with a large subchorionic hematoma and heavy bleeding the entire pregnancy. The next ended at 6 weeks (also has a subchorionic hematoma), the last at 7 weeks and wasn’t able to see before the miscarriage if I had a hematoma with that one (although I had ultrasound at 5 weeks, and it wasn’t present then). After the second miscarriage I had a D and C and there were no chromosomal issues found. After this second miscarriage I had a lot of testing done, and the only thing they found was that I am homozygous for the MTHFR A1298C mutation. I then started taking a prenatal with methylated folate and DHA, zinc, vitamin d, ubiquinal, a probiotic, and a baby aspirin everyday as well as changed my diet to 95 percent organic and started removing all toxins from my everyday life. I waited three cycles to get pregnant again. After much research I decided to also take lovenox when I found out I was pregnant this last miscarriage (my obgyn said it’s wasn’t necessary but agreed to prescribe). I have had thyroid function test, homocysteine, factor V leidan, factor II mutation, beta 2 glycoprotein, cardiolipin igG/igM/igA, antithrombin, protein C activity and protein S Ag, lupus, and AMA, which all came back in the normal range. Again, only mthfr was found. Any help on what might be happening, and what I might do next would be appreciated. Thank you!
Good morning,
I am a 33-year-old female with a history of stage 4 endometriosis and possible tubal factor issues. Monthly ovulation, but experienced heavy cycles since puberty until last summer. My cycles got weirdly shorter before my 33rd birthday. From 7+ days to 4-5 days light to moderate flow, but still regular ovulation. At start of IVF treatment last month everything felt rushed. My procedure was stalled in March and Mid May I got a message to proceed and start on birth control protocol. My clinic sent a generic guide for ovarian stimulation treatment based on a calendar. It stated 225 Gonal-F and 150 menopur. I did BC from April 30th to May 16th. Baseline E2 75, HCG <1.0, P4 <.20 about 20 follicles and no cysts. After baseline I was not given a revised medication schedule. I started May 20th. Then on May 23rd I had bloodwork and my E2 was 1034 and ultrasound revealed 30 follicles. I was then monitored daily until egg retrieval. From there they reduced my medication levels. May 23rd 150 Gonal F, 150 menopur. May 24th 32 follicles E2 1380. Gonal F 150, menopur 75. May 25th E2 2780 Gonal F 75, menopur 150, cetrotide .25. May 26th E2 2969 Gonal F 75, menopur 150, cetrotide .25, May 27th E2 3036 P4 1.06, Gonal F 112, menopur 150, cetrotide .25. May 28th E2 5821, P4 1.54, Gonal-F zero, menopur 75, cetrotide .25. May 29th E2 was 8500 and I triggered with .8 cc of lupron that morning I had .25 cetrotide. I started cabergoline Friday night after doctor said I was at risk for OHSS. At egg retrieval 5/31 only 14 of the 32 were deemed mature at first sight. Upon further inspection on 7 were M1 and M2 and 6 fertilized succesfully. Is this normal protocol? I do not believe they individualized treatment to my particular situation and it appeared they were trying to slow down the process of overstimulating me since May 23rd. Could this have attributed to oocyte dysmaturation?
I will break down my response in to covering 3 important considerations in your case:
1. The critical mportance of idividualizing the protocol for ovarian stimulation:
The importance of the IVF stimulation protocol on egg/embryo quality cannot be overstated. This factor seems often to be overlooked or discounted by t 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. While no one can influence underlying genetics or turn back the clock on a woman’s age, any competent IVF specialist should be able to tailor the protocol for COS to meet the individual needs of the patient.
Gonadotropins (LH and FSH), whether produced by the pituitary gland or administered by way of fertility drugs, have different “targeted” sites of action in the ovary. FSH targets cells that line the inner wall of the follicle (granulosa cells) and also form the cumulus cells that bind the egg to the inner surface of the follicle. Granulosa cells are responsible for estrogen production.
LH, on the other hand, targets the ovarian connective tissue (stroma/theca) that surrounds ovarian follicles resulting in the production of male hormones such as testosterone (predominantly), androstenedione and DHEA. These androgens are then transported to the granulosa cells of the adjacent follicles in a “bucket brigade fashion”. There FSH converts testosterone to estradiol, causing granulosa cells to multiply (proliferate) and produce estradiol, follicles to grows and eggs to develop (ovogenesis) It follows that ovarian androgens (mainly testosterone) is absolutely indispensable to follicle/ egg growth and development.
However, the emphasis is on a “normal” amount of testosterone. Over-exposure of the follicle to testosterone can in my opinion, compromise egg development and lead to an increased likelihood of chromosomal irregularities (aneuploid) following LH/hCG-induced egg maturational division (meiosis) and compromise embryo “competency/quality.
Ovarian androgens can also reach the uterine lining where they sometimes will compromise estrogen receptor -induced endometrial growth and development.
A significant percentage of older women and those who have diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) have increased LH activity is increased. Such women either over-produce LH and/or the LH produced is far more biologically active. Chronically increased LH activity leads to overgrowth of ovarian connective tissue (stroma/theca). This condition, which is often referred to as Stromal Hyperplasia or hyperthecosis can result in excessive ovarian androgen/testosterone production and poorer egg-embryo quality/competency, Similarly, women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), also characteristically have Stromal hyperplasia/hyperthecosis due to chronically increased LH activity. Thus they too often manifest with increased ovarian androgen production. It is therefore not surprising that “poor egg/embryo quality” is often also a feature of PCOS.
In my opinion, the over-administration of LH-containing menotropins such as Menopur, [which is comprised of roughly equal amount of FSH and hCG ,which acts similar to LH)], to older women, women with DOR and those who have PCOS can also lead to reduced egg/embryo competency . Similarly, drugs such as clomiphene or Letrozole that cause the pituitary gland to release excessive amounts of LH, are also potentially harmful to egg development and in my opinion, are best omitted from IVF COS protocols. This is especially the case when it comes to older women and those with DOR, who in my opinion should preferably be stimulated using FSH-dominant products such as Follistim, Puregon, Fostimon and Gonal-F.
Gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa): GnRHa such as Lupron, Buserelin, Superfact, Gonopeptyl etc. are often used to launch ovarian stimulation cycles. They act by causing an initial outpouring followed by a depletion of pituitary gonadotropins. This results in LH levels falling to low concentrations, within 4-7 days, thereby establishing a relatively “LH-free environment”. When GnRHa are administered for about 7 days prior to initiating gonadotropin stimulation (“long” pituitary down-regulation”), the LH depletion that will exist when COS is initiated, will usually be protective of subsequent egg development. In contrast, when the GnRHa administration commences along with the initiation of gonadotropin therapy, there will be a resultant immediate surge in the release of pituitary LH with the potential to increase ovarian testosterone to egg-compromising levels , from the outset of COS. This, in my opinion could be particularly harmful when undertaken in older women and those who have DOR.
GnRH-antagonists such as Ganirelix, Cetrotide and Orgalutron, on the other hand, act very rapidly (within hours) to block pituitary LH release. The purpose in using GnRH antagonists is to prevent the release of LH during COS. In contrast, the LH-lowering effect of GnRH agonists develops over a number of days.
GnRH antagonists are traditionally given, starting after 5th -7th day of gonadotropin stimulation. However, when this is done in older women and those (regardless of age) who have DOR, LH-suppression might be reached too late to prevent the deleterious effect of excessive ovarian androgen production on egg development in the early stage of ovarian stimulation. This is why, it is my preference to administer GnRH-antagonists, starting at the initiation of gonadotropin administration.
My preferred Protocols for Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS):
1.“Long” GnRHa (Lupron/Buserelin/Superfact/Gonopeptyl) Pituitary Down-regulation Protocol: The most commonly prescribed protocol for GnRHa/gonadotropin administration is the so-called “long protocol”. Here, GnRHa is given, starting a week or so prior to menstruation. This results in an initial rise in FSH and LH , which is rapidly followed by a precipitous fall to near zero. It is followed by a withdrawal bleed (menstruation), whereupon gonadotropin treatment should commence, while daily Lupron injections continue, to ensure a “low LH” environment. A modification to the “long protocol” which I prefer prescribing for older women and in cases of DOR, is the Agonist/Antagonist Conversion Protocol (A/ACP) where, upon the onset of a GnRHa-induced bleed, the agonist is supplanted by an antagonist (Ganirelix/Cetrotide/Orgalutron) and this is continued until the hCG trigger. In many such cases I often supplement with human growth hormone (HGH) in such cases in an attempt to enhance egg mitochondrial activity and so enhance egg development. This approach is often augmented with preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) of all embryos that reach the expanded blastocyst stage of development by day 5-6 post-fertilization. I also commonly recommend blastocyst banking to many such patients.
2.Short (“Flare”) GnRHa Protocol: Another GnRHa usage for COS is the so called “(micro) flare protocol”. This involves initiating gonadotropin therapy commensurate with initiation of gonadotropin administration. The supposed objective 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” constitutes “a double-edged sword”. 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/thecal androgen production which could potentially compromise egg quality, especially when it comes to older women and women with DOR. 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 when it comes to COS in older women, and in women with diminished ovarian reserve. Accordingly, I do not prescribe such protocols to my IVF patients.
3.Estrogen Priming – This is the approach I sometimes prescribe for my patients who have virtually depleted ovarian reserve , as determined by very low blood anti-Mullerian hormone AMH levels (<0.2ng/ml or 2 pmol/L) and are thus likely to be very “poor responders”. It involves a modified A/ACP. We start with estrogen skin patches applied every 2nd day (or with the BCP) for 10 days or longer, overlap it for 3 days with a GnRHa whereupon the estrogen priming is stopped. Th GnRHa is continued until the onset of menstruation (usually 5-7 days later) to cause pituitary LH, down-regulation. Upon menstruation and confirmation by ultrasound and measurement of blood estradiol levels that adequate ovarian suppression has been achieved, The patient is given twice-weekly injections of estradiol valerate (Delestrogen) for a period of 7-8 days whereupon COS is initiated using a relatively high dosage FSH-(Follistim, Fostimon, Puregon or Gonal F), which is continued along with daily administration of GnRH antagonist until the “hCG “trigger.” This approach is often augmented with HGH administration throughout the process of COS and by preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) of all embryos that reach the expanded blastocyst stage of development by day 5-6 post-fertilization. I also commonly recommend blastocyst banking to many such patients.
Estrogen Priming has succeeded in significantly enhancing ovarian response to gonadotropins in many of otherwise very poor responders.
Triggering egg Maturation prior to egg Retrieval: hCG versus GnRHa
With ovulation induction using fertility drugs, the administration of 10,000U hCGu (Pregnyl; Profasi, Novarel) or 500mcg hCGr (Ovidrel/Ovitrel) “trigger”) sends the eggs (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 they had prior to the “trigger”. Such a chromosomally numerically normal (euploid), mature (MII) eggs, upon being fertilized will (hopefully) propagate euploid embryos that have 46 chromosomes and will be “: competent” to propagate viable pregnancies. In my opinion, the key is to always “trigger” with no less than 10,000U of hCGu or 500mcg hCGr (Ovidrel/Ovitrel). Any lesser dosage often will reduce the efficiency of meiosis and increase the risk of the eggs being aneuploid. I personally do not use the agonist (Lupron) “trigger”, unless it is combined with (low dosage) hCG. The supposed reason for using the agonist, (Lupron) “trigger” is that by inducing meiosis through compelling a surge in the release of LH by the pituitary gland, the risk it reduces the risk of OHSS. This may be true, but it 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 likelihood of aneuploid and immature (MI) eggs. And there are other better approaches to preventing OHSS (e.g. “prolonged coasting”), in my opinion.
Use of the Birth Control Pill (BCP) to launch IVF-COS.
In natural (unstimulated) as well as in cycles stimulated with fertility drugs, the ability of follicles to properly respond to FSH stimulation is dependent on their having developed FSH-responsive receptors. Pre-antral follicles (PAF) do not have such primed FSH receptors and thus cannot respond properly to FSH stimulation with gonadotropins. The acquisition of FSH receptor responsivity requires that the pre-antral follicles be exposed to FSH, for a number of days (5-7) during which time they attain “FSH-responsivity” and are now known as antral follicles (AF). These AF’s are now able to respond properly to stimulation with administered FSH-gonadotropins. In regular menstrual cycles, the rising FSH output from the pituitary gland insures that PAFs convert tor AF’s. The BCP (as well as prolonged administration of estrogen/progesterone) suppresses FSH. This suppression needs to be countered by artificially causing blood FSH levels to rise in order to cause PAF to AF conversion prior to COS commencing, otherwise pre-antral-to –antral follicle conversion will not take place in an orderly fashion, the duration of ovarian stimulation will be prolonged and both follicle and egg development may be compromised. GnRH agonists cause an immediate surge in release of FSH by the pituitary gland thus causing conversion from PAF to SAF. This is why women who take a BCP to launch a cycle of COS need to have an overlap of the BCP with an agonist. By overlapping the BCP with an agonist for a few days prior to menstruation the early recruited follicles are able to complete their developmental drive to the AF stage and as such, be ready to respond appropriately to optimal ovarian stimulation. Using this approach, the timing of the initiation of the IVF treatment cycle can readily and safely be regulated and controlled by varying the length of time that the woman is on the BCP.
Since optimizing follicular response to COS requires that prior to stimulation with gonadotropins, FSH-induced conversion from PAF to AF’s first be completed and the BCP suppresses FSH, it follows when it comes to women launching COS coming off a BCP something needs to be done to cause a rise in FSH for 5-7 days prior to menstruation heralding the cycle of CO S. This is where overlapping the BCP with a GnRHa comes in. The agonist causes FSH to be released by the pituitary gland and if overlapped with the BCP for several days and this will (within 2-5 days) facilitate PAF to AF conversion…. in time to start COS with the onset of menstruation. Initiating ovarian stimulation in women taking a BCP, without doing this is suboptimal.
2. OHSS:
Severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is a life-endangering complication that occurs in some women undergoing controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS). OHSS 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 that a patient 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 at risk of developing OHSS, 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 (PC): OHSS can be a life-endangering complication of ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins. The risk of OHSS begins with the hCG “trigger”. The complication occurs in very high responders to gonadotropin stimulation. Women with PC0S, irregular cycles and AMH levels that are X3 the normal are at the greatest risk of developing OHSS. In such patients, ovarian stimulation commences with the same approach as above (using a BCP launch and an agonist (e.g Lupron/buserelin/Superfact/aminopeptidyl) overlap. Only in such patients a very low dosage regime of FSHr /menotropin isused . Then, starting on day 7 of ovarian stimulation, serial daily blood estradiol (E2) and ultrasound follicle assessments are done to track follicle development and [E2]. If there are > 25 follicles, gonadotropin stimulating continues, regardless of the [E2]. As soon as 50% of all follicles reach 14mm and the [E2] exceeds 2,500pg/ml gonadotropin stimulation id abruptly stopped, while daily agonist injections continue. Daily blood [E2 ] is tracked, (without necessarily continuing serial ultrasound follicle measurements). The [E2] will almost invariably continue to rise for a few days whereupon it will begin to, drop. As soon as the [E2] drops below 2,500pg/ml, a “trigger” shot of 10,000U hCGu or hCGr is administered and an egg retrieval is performed 36 hours later. At this point, All mature (MII) eggs are either cryobanked (vitrified) or (as is far more commonly the case), are fertilized by intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) and are then cultured for 5-6 days to the blastocyst stage whereupon they are either biopsied for preimplantation genetic screening and then cryopreserved (vitrified) for future use vitrified without prior biopsy for PGS or e transferred fresh, to the uterus during the same cycle of treatment. The outcome of PC depends on the precise timing of the initiation and conclusion of “prolonged coasting”. If you start PC too early, follicle growth will arrest, and the cycle will be lost. Conversely, if you start too late, you will encounter too many post-mature/cystic follicles (>22mm) that usually harbor abnormally developed eggs. Use of “Coasting” avoids severe OHSS, and minimizes the risk of poor egg/embryo quality in a group of women who otherwise would be at severe risk of life-endangering complications and prone to producing a high percentage of “incompetent” eggs/embryos.
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.
3. Endometriosis and IVF:
When women with infertility due to endometriosis seek treatment, they are all too often advised to first try ovarian stimulation (ovulation Induction) with intrauterine insemination (IUI) ………as if to say that this would be just as likely to result in a baby as would in vitro fertilization (IVF). Nothing could be further from reality It is time to set the record straight. And hence this communication!
Bear in mind that the cost of treatment comprises both financial and emotional components and that it is the cost of having a baby rather than cost of a procedure. Then consider the fact that regardless of her age or the severity of the condition, women with infertility due to endometriosis are several fold more likely to have a baby per treatment cycle of IVF than with IUI. It follows that there is a distinct advantage in doing IVF first, rather than as a last resort.
So then, why is it that ovulation induction with or without IUI is routinely offered proposed preferentially to women with mild to moderately severe endometriosis? Could it in part be due to the fact that most practicing doctors do not provide IVF services but are indeed remunerated for ovarian stimulation and IUI services and are thus economically incentivized to offer IUI as a first line approach? Or is because of the often erroneous belief that the use of fertility drugs will in all cases induce the release (ovulation) of multiple eggs at a time and thereby increase the chance of a pregnancy. The truth however is that while normally ovulating women (the majority of women who have mild to moderately severe endometriosis) respond to ovarian stimulation with fertility drugs by forming multiple follicles, they rarely ovulate > 1 (or at most 2) egg at a time. This is because such women usually only develop a single dominant follicle which upon ovulating leaves the others intact. This is the reason why normally ovulating women who undergo ovulation induction usually will not experience improved pregnancy potential, nor will they have a marked increase in multiple pregnancies. Conversely, non-ovulating women (as well as those with dysfunctional ovulation) who undergo ovulation induction, almost always develop multiple large follicles that tend to ovulate in unison. This increases the potential to conceive along with an increased risk multiple pregnancies.
So let me take a stab at explaining why IVF is more successful than IUI or surgical correction in the treatment of endometriosis-related infertility:
1.The toxic pelvic factor: Endometriosis is a condition where the lining of the uterus (the endometrium) grows outside the uterus. While this process begins early in the reproductive life of a woman, with notable exceptions, it only becomes manifest in the 2ndhalf of her reproductive life. After some time, these deposits bleed and when the blood absorbs it leaves a visible pigment that can be identified upon surgical exposure of the pelvis. Such endometriotic deposits invariably produce and release toxins” into the pelvic secretions that coat the surface of the membrane (the peritoneum) that envelops all abdominal and pelvic organs, including the uterus, tubes and ovaries. These toxins are referred to as “the peritoneal factor”. Following ovulation, the egg(s) must pass from the ovary (ies), through these toxic secretions to reach the sperm lying in wait in the outer part the fallopian tube (s) tube(s) where, the sperm lie in waiting. In the process of going from the ovary(ies) to the Fallopian tube(s) these eggs become exposed to the “peritoneal toxins” which alter s the envelopment of the egg (i.e. zona pellucida) making it much less receptive to being fertilized by sperm. As a consequence, if they are chromosomally normal such eggs are rendered much less likely to be successfully fertilized. Since almost all women with endometriosis have this problem, it is not difficult to understand why they are far less likely to conceive following ovulation (whether natural or induced through ovulation induction). This “toxic peritoneal factor impacts on eggs that are ovulated whether spontaneously (as in natural cycles) or following the use of fertility drugs and serves to explain why the chance of pregnancy is so significantly reduced in normally ovulating women with endometriosis.
2.The Immunologic Factor: About one third of women who have endometriosis will also have an immunologic implantation dysfunction (IID) linked to activation of uterine natural killer cells (NKa). This will require selective immunotherapy with Intralipid infusions, and/or heparinoids (e.g. Clexane/Lovenox) that is much more effectively implemented in combination with IVF.
3.Surgical treatment of mild to moderate endometriosis does not usually improve pregnancy potential:. The reason is that endometriosis can be considered to be a “work in progress”. New lesions are constantly developing. So it is that for every endometriotic seen there are usually many non-pigmented deposits that are in the process of evolving but are not yet visible to the naked eye and such evolving (non-visible) lesions can also release the same “toxins that compromise fertilization. Accordingly, even after surgical removal of all visible lesions the invisible ones continue to release “toxins” and retain the ability to compromise natural fertilization. It also explains why surgery to remove endometriotic deposits in women with mild to moderate endometriosis usually will fail to significantly improve pregnancy generating potential. In contrast, IVF, by removing eggs from the ovaries prior to ovulation, fertilizing these outside of the body and then transferring the resulting embryo(s) to the uterus, bypasses the toxic pelvic environment and is therefore is the treatment of choice in cases of endometriosis-related infertility.
4.Ovarian Endometriomas: Women, who have advanced endometriosis, often have endometriotic ovarian cysts, known as endometriomas. These cysts contain decomposed menstrual blood that looks like melted chocolate…hence the name “chocolate cysts”. These space occupying lesions can activate ovarian connective tissue (stroma or theca) resulting in an overproduction of male hormones (especially testosterone). An excess of ovarian testosterone can severely compromise follicle and egg development in the affected ovary. Thus there are two reasons for treating endometriomas. The first is to alleviate symptoms and the second is to optimize egg and embryo quality. Conventional treatment of endometriomas involves surgical drainage of the cyst contents with subsequent removal of the cyst wall (usually by laparoscopy), increasing the risk of surgical complications. We recently reported on a new, effective and safe outpatient approach to treating endometriomas in women planning to undergo IVF. We termed the treatment ovarian Sclerotherapy. The process involves; needle aspiration of the “chocolate colored liquid content of the endometriotic cyst, followed by the injection of 5% tetracycline hydrochloride into the cyst cavity. Such treatment will, more than 75% of the time result in disappearance of the lesion within 6-8 weeks. Ovarian sclerotherapy can be performed under local anesthesia or under conscious sedation. It is a safe and effective alternative to surgery for definitive treatment of recurrent ovarian endometriomas in a select group of patients planning to undergo IVF
I am not suggesting that all women with infertility-related endometriosis should automatically resort to IVF. Quite to the contrary…. In spite of having reduced fertility potential, many women with mild to moderate endometriosis can and do go on to conceive on their own (without treatment). It is just that the chance of this happening is so is much lower than normal.
IN SUMMARY: For young ovulating women (< 35 years of age ) with endometriosis, who have normal reproductive anatomy and have fertile male partners, expectant treatment is often preferable to IUI or IVF. However, for older women, women who (regardless of their age) have any additional factor (e.g. pelvic adhesions, ovarian endometriomas, male infertility, IID or diminished ovarian reserve-DOR) IVF should be the primary treatment of choice. I strongly recommend that you visit 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: •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) 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: PLEASE READ!! INTRODUCING SHER FERTILITY SOLUTIONS (SFS) Founded in April 2019, Sher Fertility Solutions (SFS) offers online (Skype/FaceTime) consultations to patients from > 40 different countries. All consultations are followed by a detailed written report presenting my personal recommendations for treatment of what often constitute complex Reproductive Issues.
If you wish to schedule an online consultation with me, please contact my assistant (Patti Converse) by phone (800-780-7437/702-533-2691), email (concierge@SherIVF.com) or, enroll online on then home-page of my website (www.SherIVF.com).
PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT SFS!
Geoff Sher
Hola mi nombre es liliana tengo 37 años y aún no e podido quedar embarazada quiero buscar ayuda para saber las posibilidades de tener un hijo como puedo aser para consultar a ese doctor,
Please post in English!
Geoff Sher