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.
I have two children, aged 5 and 2, each obtained after medicated FETs from 2 ICSI cycles (4 fresh cycles total – 2 agonist and them 2 antagonist cycles). I live in Switzerland where only 3 embryos are allowed to progress at a time. Our diagnosis is moderate MFI. We just attempted an FET with our two remaining zygotes but they lysed upon unthawing – 1 immediately and the other within 24 h. I am now 40 and a recent AMH was 41 (around 5-6 on the US scale), day 3 FSH was 8.7, and E2 and LH levels were normal. I have a high AFC. Although I had hoped to be done with childbearing at 40 my husband and I are having and hard time deciding what to do as we would both love a 3rd child but I am concerned about egg quality given my age and the Swiss system gives slow results. I just saw a RE in the area we now live in that recommended an agonist cycle with Gonal 150 (the highest dose I have ever had in the past) and polar body biopsy for PGS which she said increases their pregnancy rate from about 15% to 40% in my age group. I am a physician and my research suggests that PB biopsy isn’t as accurate as blastomere biopsy and I am bothered by the idea that we would potentially discard viable eggs/zygotes/embryos (due to false-positive results and/or the ability of the embryo to self-correct). What are your thoughts on this type of PGD – is worth it or not? Cycling outside this country unfortunately is not an option for us. Thanks in advance!
We were the 1st to use polar bosy biopsy in IVF. It is quite effective, but when there is a committed sperm provider, it really is not as good as embryo biopsy because the latter examines both the egg and sperm contribution. We use PB biopsies for egg banking (young single women wanting to preserve their fertility) and in cases where we need to differentiate between an egg or sperm factor causing Reproductive dysfunction.
The one advantage of PB biopsy is that if it reveals aneuploidy, it of course is always meiotic in origin and therefore irreversible. Embryo biopsy does NOT pewrmit differentiation between meiotic and mitotic aneuploidy (mosaicism). The latter can autocorrect while the former,cannot.
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 pre-implantation embryo development, and represents a major cause of early pregnancy loss. About a decade ago, I and an associate, Levent Keskintepe Ph.D. were the first to introduce full embryo karyotyping (identification of all 46 chromosomes) through preimplantation genetic sampling (PGS) as a method by which to selectively transfer only euploid embryos (i.e. those that have a full component of chromosomes) to the uterus. We subsequently reported on a 2-3 fold improvement in implantation and birth rates as well as a significant reduction in early pregnancy loss, following IVF. Since then PGS has grown dramatically in popularity such that it is now widely used throughout the world.
Most IVF programs that offer PGS services, require that all participating patients consent to all their aneuploid embryos (i.e. those with an irregular quota of chromosomes) be disposed of. However, there is now growing evidence to suggest that following embryo transfer, some aneuploid embryos will in the process of ongoing development, convert to the euploid state (i.e. “auto correction”) and then go on to develop into chromosomally normal offspring. In fact, I am personally aware of several such cases occurring within our IVF network. So clearly, by 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 all aneuploid embryos we, in so doing, might 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 “auto correction” 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.” Many such mosaic embryos will In the process of subsequent cell replication convert to the normal euploid state (i.e. autocorrect)
It is against this background, that an ever increasing number of IVF practitioners, rather than summarily discard PGS-identified aneuploid embryos are now choosing to cryobanking (freeze-store) certain of them, to leave open the possibility of ultimately transferring them to the uterus. In order to best understand the complexity of the factors involved in such decision making, it is essential to understand the causes of embryo aneuploidy of which there are two varieties:
1.Meiotic aneuploidy” results from aberrations in chromosomal numerical configuration that originate in either the egg (most commonly) and/or in sperm, during preconceptual maturational division (meiosis). Since meiosis occurs in the pre-fertilized egg or in and sperm, it follows that when aneuploidy occurs due to defective meiosis, all subsequent cells in the developing embryo/blastocyst/conceptus inevitably will be aneuploid, precluding subsequent “auto correction”. Meiotic aneuploidy will thus invariably be perpetuated in all the cells of the embryo as they replicate. It is a permanent phenomenon and is irreversible. All embryos so affected are thus fatally damaged. Most will fail to implant and those that do implant will either be lost in early pregnancy or develop into chromosomally defective offspring (e.g. Down syndrome, Edward syndrome, Turner syndrome).
2.“Mitotic aneuploidy” occurs when following fertilization and subsequent cell replication (cleavage), some cells (blastomeres) of a meiotically euploid early embryo mutate and become aneuploid. This is referred to as mosaicism. Thereupon, with continued subsequent cell replication (mitosis) the chromosomal make-up (karyotype) of the embryo might either comprise of predominantly aneuploid cells or euploid cells. The subsequent viability or competency of the conceptus will thereupon depend on whether euploid or aneuploid cells predominate. If in such mosaic embryos aneuploid cells predominate, the embryo will be “incompetent”). If (as is frequently the case) euploid cells prevail, the mosaic embryo will be “competent” and capable of propagating a normal conceptus.
Since some mitotically aneuploid (“mosaic”) embryos can and indeed do “autocorrect’ while meiotically aneuploid embryos cannot, it follows that an ability to differentiate between these two varieties of aneuploidy would be of enormous clinical value. Since some mosaic embryos can “autocorrect” and even go on to propagate a viable baby, the ability to confirm that aneuploidy is mitotic (potentially reversible) would provide a strong argument in favor of preserving certain aneuploid embryos for future dispensation. Unfortunately however, there is presently no microscopic or genetic test that can reliable differentiate between meiotic and mitotic aneuploidy.
Aneuploidy, whether meiotic or mitotic in origin involves the addition of one or more chromosomes to a given pair in human embryos. Certain aneuploidies involve only a single, chromosome pair (simple aneuploidy) while others involve more than a single pair (i.e. complex aneuploidy). Evidence suggests that complex aneuploidy, whether meiotic or mitotic in origin is almost always lethal while all forms of meiotic aneuploidy are permanent. Some aneuploidies, especially those that involve addition of a chromosome to any pair (trisomy) will at times progress to clinical pregnancies (e.g. trisomy 15, 18, 21 or when the sex chromosomes are involve). And as stated previously, most aneuploid embryos, should they attach, will miscarry or result in a chromosomally defective offspring.
On the other hand, some aneuploid embryos have one chromosome (in a given pair) missing (i.e. monosomy). Aside from monosomy involving absence of the Y-sex chromosome (i.e. XO) which can resulting in a live birth (Turner syndrome) all other monosomies involving autosomes (non-sex chromosomes) are lethal and will not result in viable offspring.
Since it is presently not possible, without removing more than 1 cell from an embryo (a very traumatic event) to differentiate between meiotic and mitotic aneuploidy, it follows that making a diagnosis of embryo aneuploidy does not allow for identification of mosaic embryos for transfer. This is especially true when it comes to trisomic embryos that can and sometimes do, propagate chromosomal birth defects such as Down syndrome. It is important to bear in mind that the transfer of trisomic embryos (whether due to meiotic or mitotic aneuploidy) can result in miscarriage or a birth defect. This makes any attempt to transfer such embryos to the uterus fraught with risk and in my opinion, ill advised. Conversely, since true meiotic autosomal monosomic embryos cannot propagate viable pregnancies, performing embryo transfer in such cases in the hope that the aneuploidy is mitotic (mosaic) in origin and will spontaneously “ auto correct”, is a rational consideration. Needless to say, such action would require full disclosure, and the execution of a detailed, informed consent agreement which would include an expressed commitment to undergo prenatal genetic testing 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.
Since it is meiotic rather than mitotic aneuploidy that is invariably lethal and given that meiotic aneuploidy originates in the egg, it is my belief that the closer to fertilization that embryo biopsy is done for PGS, the more likely it is that any aneuploidy detected, will be meiotic in origin. The longer you wait thereafter, the greater the likelihood that with repeated mitotic division, mutational changes will result in mitotic aneuploidy (mosaicism). This is why I strongly believe embryo biopsies should be performed on day 2-3 post fertilization rather on day 5-6 days (the blastocyst stage).”
Please visit my new Blog at http://goo.gl/4hvjoP , find the “search bar” and 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.
•Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) for IVF: Selecting the ideal protocol
•IVF: Factors Affecting Egg/Embryo “competency” during Controlled Ovarian Stimulation(COS)
•Anti Mullerian Hormone (AMH) Measurement to Assess Ovarian Reserve and Design the Optimal Protocol for Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in IVF.
•The “Biological Clock” and how it should Influence the Selection and Design of Ovarian Stimulation Protocols for IVF.
•PGS-Biopsy for the Assessment of Embryo Numerical Chromosomal integrity (Ploidy): Should it be done on Day 3 or on Day 5-6 post fertilization?
•Embryo Banking/Stockpiling: Slows the “Biological Clock” and offers a Selective Alternative to IVF-Egg Donation.
•Preimplantation Genetic Sampling (PGS) Using: Next Generation Gene Sequencing (NGS): Method of Choice.
•Fertility Preservation (FP) Through Freezing/Banking Human Eggs
•Selective Banking of Genetically Tested Donor Eggs:
I invite you to call 702-699-7437 or 800-780-7437 or go online on this site and set up a one hour Skype consultation with me to discuss your case in detail.
I also suggest that you access the 4th edition of my book ,”In Vitro Fertilization, the ART of Making Babies”. It is available as a down-load through http://www.Amazon.com or from most bookstores and public libraries.
Geoff Sher
My menses comes every month and I have check my womb in the hospital and the Dr said everything is ok but why I’m I not getting pregnant four yes now?
There is so much more information needed to even start evaluating the cause.
See a local RE and undergo ma full assessment.
Good luck!
Geoff Sher
Hi Dr. Sher, what are your thoughts on the below hCG rise after a 5-day PGD-tested blastocyst?
9 days after transfer hCG came back as 16 (very low but a positive)
3 days later, 12 days after transfer, hCG was 60 (quadrupled)
3 days later, 15 days after transfer, hCG was only 70 (raised but not double)
3 days later, 18 days after transfer, hCG is 99 (again, raised but not double)
Sadly this looks like a failed implantation…a chemical pregnancy. Discuss with your RE.
So sorry.
Geoff Sher
Dr Sher,
My husband and i were blessed with a daughter who is now 3 without any fertility treatments. We then decided to try for a second child. In the last 2 years, we were able to get pregnant 3 times, all ending in miscarriage. Following the last miscarriage, we decided to pursue IVF. We used ICSI and had all embryos PGS tested. We’ve since had 2 failed FETs with great lining, genetically tested embryos, and everything looking “great.” Any thoughts on what we should look for before using up our last frozen embryo? Thank you!
While Primary infertility refers to the inability of a woman who has never been pregnant in the past, to conceive, Secondary Infertility is defined as an inability to conceive more than 1 year after having conceived in the past. Most patients find it difficult to accept the fact that having once been able to conceive they are now unable to do so. When confronted with the proposition that they need IVF, women who have Secondary Infertility find it harder to accept than do those who have Primary Infertility. It commonly raises issues of guilt, a declining sense of self-worth and ultimately self-recrimination impacting rational decision making, family dynamics that involve partners and siblings and relatives. The fact is that secondary infertility can be just as difficult for individuals and family to deal with as primary infertility.
There are several factors that contribute to the problem of Secondary Infertility. These include:
•Social and marital factors: In this modern day and age where at least one in two marriages ends in divorce, it is not surprising that there would be an inevitable hiatus in childbearing. This often results in a considerable delay in re-initiating family building. Since the biological clock keeps on ticking in the interim, advancing age can, and often does, have a profound effect on a woman’s ability to subsequently conceive and successfully complete a pregnancy. In my experience, this is one of the most common reasons for secondary infertility. In addition, by the time a decision is made to enter a new relationship, many men and women will have undergone a prior sterilization procedure which now needs to be addressed. To make matters worse, many such men and women first opt for surgical reversal of their occlusive surgery, only to learn in the end that the procedures were not successful, and they now need to consider in vitro fertilization (IVF) in one form or another.
•Financial factors: Here, the cost of raising a child often weighs heavily, especially in this present tough economic climate. This is becoming more of an issue as women playing an ever increasing role as a primary bread winner.
•Career demands: There can be little doubt that when it comes to climbing the career ladder, women are considerably disadvantaged by the fact that pregnancy and the immediate demands of child rearing take away from their ability to compete with men. As such, many women choose to delay having another child until such time as they have been able to make up for prior lost opportunity.
•Medical barriers to fertility: Certain common medical conditions, while not absolutely precluding pregnancy, make it much more difficult to conceive.
•Endometriosis: It is not uncommon for women with endometriosis to achieve a pregnancy, but find difficulty in doing so again at a later date. The reason for this is that while most women with endometriosis have patent fallopian tubes, the environment surrounding their tubes is compromised due to pelvic toxins that are produced by the endometriotic implants. These toxins compromise egg fertilization potential, making it more difficult for sperm in the fallopian tube to fertilize the egg upon its arrival there. As such, endometriosis is one of the commonest causes of secondary infertility.
•Tubal damage due to prior pelvic inflammatory disease: In first world countries, the early and often indiscriminate use of antibiotics for the slightest symptom has led to the point where an acute attack of pelvic inflammatory disease is often masked. As such, less than 30% of American women with tubal damage have knowledge that their tubes are compromised and that they might have subsequent difficulty in conceiving. Since, in many such cases the tubal damage will not have totally blocked both tubes, some of the women so affected might experience a pregnancy but have difficulty in conceiving again later down the line.
•Dysfunctional ovulation: Since ovulation as well as normal hormonal support of the early implanting embryo are both essential for a healthy pregnancy to occur, it follows that women with irregular or dysfunctional ovulation (e.g., polycystic ovarian syndrome – PCOS, persistent follicular luteal phase deficiencies or post birth control pill ovulatory problems) might sporadically conceive and thereupon find it difficult to do achieve another pregnancy later on.
•Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID): has become ever more apparent that immunologic factors play an important role in achieving healthy implantation. Women with endometriosis (regardless of its severity), those with a personal or family history of autoimmune diseases such as lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis and thyroid autoimmunity (TAI), and some cases where the man and the woman share certain genetic similarities involving DQ alpha and HLA genotype (alloimmune implantation dysfunction), will have activated T cells (cytotoxic lymphocytes) and natural killer cells (NKa)CTL/NK cells that can inhibit or compromise healthy implantation. This is an often overlooked cause of secondary infertility. Most such autoimmune/alloimmune cases require selective immunotherapy and IVF.
•Anti-sperm Antibodies: Although infrequent, some cases of secondary infertility might also be caused by the woman harboring anti-sperm antibodies. In such cases IVF is mandated.
•Previous post-pregnancy uterine inflammation: Retention of products of conception after the birth of a child, miscarriage, or abortion can so damage the uterine lining as to result in subsequent implantation failure. Unless specifically looked for, this will usually be unknown to the patient, who will simply present with secondary infertility. Treatment is often difficult because such patients might not respond adequately to surgical removal of intrauterine scar tissue or to hormonal or Viagra therapy.
Male immunologic factors: Most men who have undergone a previous vasectomy more than 10 years earlier, will have anti-sperm antibodies that will interfere with fertilization. Such cases require IVF with intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Here we offer a few words of caution to men who are considering undergoing surgical reversal of vasectomy. Always first have a test done to exclude the presence of circulating anti-sperm antibodies, because in such cases, even if the reversal is successfully performed, they will not be able to initiate a pregnancy without IVF/ICSI.
Whatever the cause, Secondary Infertility often affects older couples disproportionately, creating a sense of urgency and even desperation in achieving a viable pregnancy before time runs out. It is for this reason that IVF becomes the treatment of choice in such cases. However, even IVF becomes progressively less successful with advancing age of the woman (whose eggs are being fertilized). In such cases it is important for the couple to be realistic with regard to their expectations. Here, options that include embryo banking and egg donation should be carefully considered.
Finally, whenever a regularly ovulating younger woman (under 36 years of age) with patent fallopian tubes is diagnosed with secondary infertility, it is essential to consider underlying endometriosis or non-obstructive tubal disease as a possible cause. In such cases, IVF often becomes the treatment of choice.
Please visit my new Blog at http://goo.gl/4hvjoP , find the “search bar” and 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.
•Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) for IVF: Selecting the ideal protocol
•Ovarian Stimulation for IVF using GnRH Antagonists: Comparing the Agonist/Antagonist Conversion Protocol.(A/ACP) With the“Conventional” Antagonist Aproach
•Ovarian Stimulation for IVF: Comparing “conventional” use of GnRH antagonists to the Agonist/Antagonist Conversion Protocol (A/ACP)
•IVF: Factors Affecting Egg/Embryo “competency” during Controlled Ovarian Stimulation(COS)
•Anti Mullerian Hormone (AMH) Measurement to Assess Ovarian Reserve and Design the Optimal Protocol for Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in IVF.
•The “Biological Clock” and how it should Influence the Selection and Design of Ovarian Stimulation Protocols for IVF.
•Diagnosing and Treating Infertility due to Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR)
•Launching Ovarian Stimulation with a BCP: How Does it Affect Response??
•Frozen Embryo Transfer (FET): What Does it Involve?
•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)
•Traveling for IVF from Out of State/Country–
•A personalized, stepwise approach to IVF
•The Role of Nutritional Supplements in Preparing for IVF
•Molar Pregnancy: What is it and How Should it be Treated?
•Fragile X Syndrome: Which IVF Candidates Should be Tested and How Should Results be Interpreted?
I invite you to call 702-699-7437 or 800-780-7437 or go online on this site and set up a one hour Skype consultation with me to discuss your case in detail.
I also suggest that you access the 4th edition of my book ,”In Vitro Fertilization, the ART of Making Babies”. It is available as a down-load through http://www.Amazon.com or from most bookstores and public libraries.
Geoff Sher
Does a drop in e2 after trigger (shown at retrieval) tell us anything? Is e2 supposed to rise with a trigger shot? I have read that it may be a sign of low quality eggs if estrogen drops after trigger but others dispute this.