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.
Dear Dr Sher
Does the antagonist like orgalutran and cetrotde, if administered too early, cause a stop in eggs maturing further? For example if your follicles are just 12-13mm in size and you take the antagonist from then onwards, can it be that eggs just stop developing?
When is the best time to start administering the antagonist (size of follicles)?
Are cetrotide and orgalutran the same / work the same?
Absolutely not! In my opinion, it is preferential to start the antagonist with the onset of stimulation.
The conventional use of GnRH antagonists: The ‘traditional GnRH antagonist protocol as currently used for controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) involves the administration of 250mcg daily starting from the 6th to 8th day of stimulation with gonadotropins. There is in my opinion a significant downside to using this approach, especially in older women with diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR) and in women with PCOS who often have elevated LH-induced ovarian male hormone activity (predominantly testosterone) production. In such cases the initiation of GnRH antagonist-induced pituitary LH suppression comes too late in the COS cycle to adequately suppress the potentially harmful effect of excessive LH-induced ovarian testosterone on egg development. While it is true that LH is essential for the production by follicular estradiol and for egg development, too much LH bioactivity in certain women, will lead to overproduction of ovarian testosterone which in turn can have a decidedly deleterious effect on egg development and “competency”. The “conventional approach” where initiation of GnRH antagonist administration begins 6-8 days after COS is initiated, leaves follicles and their eggs over-exposed to ovarian testosterone…at the most vulnerable stage of development. This, in my opinion leads to poorer quality eggs/embryos.
When asked why with this traditional approach GnRH administration commences so late (day 6-8 of the cycle), the standard response given is usually that the purpose is to suppress LH in time to avoid a “premature LH surge” which is known to severely compromise egg development. But the term “premature LH surge” is a misnomer. It suggests an isolated sporadic insult and this is NOT so. In fact the final “LH surge” represents an end point resulting from a progressive escalation in LH-–induced ovarian testosterone production (“a staircase effect”) that causes premature luteinization of the granulosa cells that form the inner lining of follicles. This ultimately manifests with increasing blood progesterone levels. However by the time the latter is observed, it is too late to reverse the damage already inflicted on developing eggs. In my opinion, the use of such late GnRH antagonist COS protocols in women with normal ovarian reserve is probably no better than straight stimulation without using an antagonist.
The Agonist/Antagonist Conversion Protocol: (A/ACP) With regular long Lupron down regulation protocol where the initiation of a GnRH agonist (Lupron, Superfact, Buserelin) is initiated about 7-14 days prior to starting stimulation with gonadotropins and then continued throughout the COS cycle, the pituitary gland output of LH is largely exhausted and LH-induced testosterone is down-regulated. In this way, an adverse effect on follicle and egg development is minimized. The down side however, is the fact that prolonged administration of GnRH agonists could suppress subsequent ovarian response to ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins, by competitively binding with ovarian FSH receptors. It was against this background that I introduced an approach that combines the use of the GnRH agonist with a GnRH antagonist and termed this, the Agonist/Antagonist Conversion Protocol (A/ACP)
With the A/ACP, an antagonist (Ganirelix/Cetrotide/Orgalutron) is commenced at the onset of spontaneous menstruation, or following bleeding that follows initiation of GnRH agonist (e.g. Lupron/Superfact/Buserelin) therapy using a long-down-regulation protocol arrangement. The antagonist is then continued up until the day of the hCG “trigger”. I presently prescribe the A/ACP protocol for patients most of our IVF patients regardless of whether they are “normal responders” or “poor responders”. Preliminary results suggest a significant improvement in egg number, egg/embryo quality as well as in implantation and viable IVF pregnancy rates. The A/ACP has however, proven to be most advantageous in “poor responders” where additional enhancement of ovarian response to gonadotropins may be achieved through incorporation of “estrogen priming”. We have reported on the fact that the addition of estradiol valerate for about a week following the initiation of the A/ACP, prior to commencing FSH-dominant gonadotropin stimulation (and its continuation throughout COS) appears to further enhance ovarian response, presumably by up-regulating ovarian FSH-receptors. ”. We refer to this as the A/ACP+ E2V.
There is one potential draw back to the use of the A/ACP, in that the sustained use of a GnRH antagonist throughout the stimulation phase of the cycle, appears to compromise the predictive value of serial plasma estradiol measurements as a measure of follicle growth and development in that the estradiol levels tend to be much lower in comparison to cases where GnRH-agonist alone is used or where a “ conventional”/”traditional” GnRH antagonist protocol is employed ( i.e. where GnRH-antagonist administration is commenced 6-8 days following initiation of gonadotropin stimulation). In my opinion, this effect, rather than being attributable to reduced follicular production of estradiol is likely to result from floors in the ability of available commercial kits used to measure estradiol levels accurately in this setting. Thus when the A/ACP is employed, I tend to rely much more on ultrasound growth of follicles along with serial observation of the trend in the rise of estradiol levels, than on absolute estradiol values. I specifically try to avoid using of the A/ACP protocol in cases where the woman his deemed to be at increased risk of the risk of developing severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and accordingly where the accurate serial measurements of plasma estradiol plays an important role in the safe ovarian stimulation.
It is quite remarkable, that while using the A/ACP + E2V in “poor responders “ whose FSH levels were often well above threshold limits, the cycle cancellation rate has consistently been maintained below 10% ( i.e. much lower than otherwise anticipated). Many such patients who were previously been told that they should give up on using their own eggs, and switch to ovum donation because of “poor ovarian reserve”, have subsequently responded adequately to this protocol and have gone on to achieve viable pregnancies using the .A/ACP with “estrogen priming”.
I strongly recommend that you visit http://www.DrGeoffreySherIVF.com. Then go to my Blog and access the “search bar”. Type in the titles of any/all of the articles listed below, one by one. “Click” and you will immediately be taken to those you select. Please also take the time to post any questions or comments with the full expectation that I will (as always) respond promptly.
•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
•Anti Mullerian Hormone (AMH) Measurement to Assess Ovarian Reserve and Design the Optimal Protocol for Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in IVF.
•Human Growth Hormone Administration in IVF: Does it Enhances Egg/Embryo Quality and Outcome?
•The BCP: Does Launching a Cycle of Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS). Coming off the BCP Compromise Response?
•Treating Out-of-State and Out-of-Country Patients at Sher-IVF in Las Vegas:
•Traveling for IVF from Out of State/Country–
•A personalized, stepwise approach to IVF
Please call or email Julie Dahan, my patient concierge. She will guide you on how to set up an in-person or Skype consultation with me. You can reach Julie at on her cell phone or via email at any time:
Julie Dahan
•Email: Julied@sherivf.com
•Phone: 702-533-2691
?800-780-7437
Geoff Sher
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.
Dear Dr.Sher,
I am a 38yr old female with PCOS.
AMH 7.5
FSH 3.2
LH 3.1
1 pregnancy 2nd round of clomid. Mmc 7weeks
I’ve had 2 cycles of IVF:
1st; follistim & menopur
30 eggs retrieved, 21 fertilized, 11 made it to day 3, zero progressed on day 5. By day 7, six very good grade, hatched embryos, were frozen. Transfered 2 frozen embryos, results were negative. RE believes the remaining 4 are probably chromosomally not normal because of day 7 development. Also, Had moderate OHSS this cycle.
2nd cycle: ganirelix 1 week before stims, 150 follistim, alternated with 75 & 75 of menopur only 2 days.
17 eggs retrieved, 14 mature, 11 fertilized with icsi. 8 looked good on day 3, the other 3 so so. By day 5 they didn’t progress much. Day 6, nothing left.
My question is: do you think my eggs are an issue? Or could it be the doctors protocol? Could it be storage of the embryos? Why do they look good up to day 3 then i have nothing left by day 5? You mentioned that menopur should not be used in patients with pcos. I have plenty of eggs, but how do i improve the quality? Is it time to find a new RE? What are my chances of a live birth? What are my chances with the frozen 7 day blasts?
Thank you & all the best!
In my opinion, your protocol could be a large part of the issue. We would need to talk because in order to be of meaningful help to you, I would need much more information.
I strongly recommend that you visit http://www.DrGeoffreySherIVF.com. Then go to my Blog and access the “search bar”. Type in the titles of any/all of the articles listed below, one by one. “Click” and you will immediately be taken to those you select. Please also take the time to post any questions or comments with the full expectation that I will (as always) respond promptly.
•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
•Ovarian Stimulation for IVF using GnRH Antagonists: Comparing the Agonist/Antagonist Conversion Protocol.(A/ACP) With the“Conventional” Antagonist Aproach
•Anti Mullerian Hormone (AMH) Measurement to Assess Ovarian Reserve and Design the Optimal Protocol for Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in IVF.
•Human Growth Hormone Administration in IVF: Does it Enhances Egg/Embryo Quality and Outcome?
•The BCP: Does Launching a Cycle of Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS). Coming off the BCP Compromise Response?
•Blastocyst Embryo Transfers Should be the Standard of Care in IVF
•Treating Out-of-State and Out-of-Country Patients at Sher-IVF in Las Vegas:
•Traveling for IVF from Out of State/Country–
•A personalized, stepwise approach to IVF
•How Many Embryos should be transferred: A Critical Decision in IVF.
•The Role of Nutritional Supplements in Preparing for IVF
•Preventing Severe Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome (OHSS) with “Prolonged Coasting”
•Understanding Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS) and the Need to Customize Ovarian Stimulation Protocols.
•“Triggering” Egg Maturation in IVF: Comparing urine-derived hCG, Recombinant DNA-hCG and GnRH-agonist:
•The “Lupron Trigger” to Prevent Severe OHSS: What are the Pro’s and Con’s?
•Intrauterine Insemination (IUI): Who Needs it & who Does Not: Pro’s & Con’s!
•Micro-IVF: Often Preferable to Ovarian Stimulation with or Without IUI
•The Role of Gender Selection in IVF.
Please call or email Julie Dahan, my patient concierge. She will guide you on how to set up an in-person or Skype consultation with me. You can reach Julie at on her cell phone or via email at any time:
Julie Dahan
•Email: Julied@sherivf.com
•Phone: 702-533-2691
?800-780-7437
Geoff Sher
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.
Dear Dr Sher
I recently had a failed IVF cycle – 4 mature eggs collected (I am 35 with an AMH of 5.1 and was on highest dose of menopur – I am based in the UK so may use different values/drugs to US!), all 4 fertilised and 3 made it to blastocyst. We had 1 high quality blast transferred and froze the other 2. I started having uterine contractions 2 days after transfer and started bleeding 2 days later, so very early.
I am now moving onto a frozen cycle. I tried to go for a natural but at my post-lh surge scan today, my lining was only 6.7mm so I have been converted to medicated. I have a naturally thin endometrium (in fact 6.7mm is really good for me!) which was only 6.9 at egg collection on my fresh cycle. I am going to be on oestrogen tablets and possibly patches and I have asked about viagra. My concern is that I’m not going to get a thick enough lining even on the medicated cycle – how thick does it really need to be? Also, I have endometriosis so I am concerned that the oestrogen is going to make that worse. I feel so confused about what to do for the best. I’ve already had a large endometrioma removed which has affected my left ovary – I would be devastated to get another with my already diminished ovarian reserve.
Please let me know if you think it would be beneficial for me to set up a Skype consultation to get some advice.
Kind regards
First, you clearly have diminished ovarian reserve which in my opinion suggests the need for stockpiling chromosomally normal embryos ASAP …for future use. The reason is that you could run out of time.
Second, you have endometriosis and 1/3 of women who have this condition (regardless of its severirty) in my opinion, also have an immunologic implantation dysfunction linked to activation of uterine natural killer cells (NKa) and/or antiphospholipid antibodies which, if present could thwart implantation.
Third , a lining of <8mm, is usually not compatible with a viable implantation.
Women who (regardless of age) have diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) tend to produce fewer and less “competent” eggs, the main reason for reduced IVF success in such cases. The compromised outcome is largely due to the fact that such women tend to have increased LH biological activity which often results in excessive LH-induced ovarian testosterone production which in turn can have a deleterious effect on egg/embryo “competency”.
Certain ovarian stimulation regimes either promote excessive LH production (e.g. short agonist/Lupron- “flare” protocols, clomiphene and Letrozole), augment LH/hCG delivered through additional administration (e.g. high dosage menotropins such as Menopur), or fail to protect against body’s own/self-produced LH (e.g. late antagonist protocols where drugs such as Ganirelix/Cetrotide/Orgalutron that are first administered 6-7 days after ovarian stimulation has commenced).
I try to avoid using such protocols/regimes (especially) in older women and those with DOR, favoring instead the use of a modified, long pituitary down-regulation protocol (the agonist/antagonist conversion protocol-A/ACP) augmented by adding supplementary human growth hormone (HGH). I further recommend Staggered IVF with embryo banking of PGS (next generation gene sequencing/NGS)-normal blastocysts in such cases. This type of approach will in my opinion, optimize the chance of a viable pregnancy per embryo transfer procedure and provide an opportunity to capitalize on whatever residual ovarian reserve and egg quality still exists, allowing the chance to “make hay while the sun still shines”.
I strongly recommend that you visit http://www.DrGeoffreySherIVF.com. Then go to my Blog and access the “search bar”. Type in the titles of any/all of the articles listed below, one by one. “Click” and you will immediately be taken to those you select. Please also take the time to post any questions or comments with the full expectation that I will (as always) respond promptly.
I strongly recommend that you visit http://www.DrGeoffreySherIVF.com. Then go to my Blog and access the “search bar”. Type in the titles of any/all of the articles listed below, one by one. “Click” and you will immediately be taken to those you select. Please also take the time to post any questions or comments with the full expectation that I will (as always) respond promptly.
•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
•Ovarian Stimulation for IVF using GnRH Antagonists: Comparing the Agonist/Antagonist Conversion Protocol.(A/ACP) With the“Conventional” Antagonist Aproach
•Anti Mullerian Hormone (AMH) Measurement to Assess Ovarian Reserve and Design the Optimal Protocol for Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in IVF.
•The “Biological Clock” and how it should Influence the Selection and Design of Ovarian Stimulation Protocols for IVF.
• A Rational Basis for selecting Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) protocols in women with Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR)
•Diagnosing and Treating Infertility due to Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR)
•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 who Have Compromised Ovarian Response to Ovarian Stimulation in Women who Have Compromised Ovarian Reserve: A Personal Approach.
•Human Growth Hormone Administration in IVF: Does it Enhances Egg/Embryo Quality and Outcome?
•The BCP: Does Launching a Cycle of Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS). Coming off the BCP Compromise Response?
•Blastocyst Embryo Transfers Should be the Standard of Care in IVF
•Why did my IVF Fail
•Blastocyst Embryo Transfers Done 5-6 Days Following Fertilization are Fast Replacing Earlier day 2-3 Transfers of Cleaved Embryos.
•Frozen Embryo Transfer (FET) versus “Fresh” ET: How to Make the Decision
•Frozen Embryo Transfer (FET): A Rational Approach to Hormonal Preparation and How new Methodology is Impacting IVF.
•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.
•Preimplantation Genetic Sampling (PGS) Using: Next Generation Gene Sequencing (NGS): Method of Choice.
•PGS in IVF: Are Some Chromosomally abnormal Embryos Capable of Resulting in Normal Babies and Being Wrongly Discarded?
•PGS and Assessment of Egg/Embryo “competency”: How Method, Timing and Methodology Could Affect Reliability
•IVF Failure and Implantation Dysfunction:
•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!
•Endometrial Thickness, Uterine Pathology and Immunologic Factors
•Vaginally Administered Viagra is Often a Highly Effective Treatment to Help Thicken a Thin Uterine Lining
•Treating Out-of-State and Out-of-Country Patients at Sher-IVF in Las Vegas:
•Traveling for IVF from Out of State/Country–
•A personalized, stepwise approach to IVF
•How Many Embryos should be transferred: A Critical Decision in IVF.
•The Role of Nutritional Supplements in Preparing for IVF
Please call or email Julie Dahan, my patient concierge. She will guide you on how to set up an in-person or Skype consultation with me. You can reach Julie at on her cell phone or via email at any time:
Julie Dahan
•Email: Julied@sherivf.com
•Phone: 702-533-2691
?800-780-7437
Geoff Sher
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.
Hi Dr Sher,
I wrote on here a couple of months ago in regards to my endometriosis, which was quite mild when I was diagnosed 2 years ago. I also mentioned that myself and my partner really want children and that my doctor said I would have more chance the younger/sooner I try. You gave me lots of information (thank you!) and i have now come of birth control 3 weeks ago.
Is there anything we can do to give us a better chance of conceiving? I am taking folic acid already. I have not had any further treatment for my endometriosis either as they only found a little last time.
Kind regards,
Danielle Wilson (20)
Not really…aside from the need to try and time intercourse accurately and also to undergo testing for an immunologic implantation dysfunction involving activation of uterine natural killer cells (NKa) and/or antiphospholipid antibodies because that would alter the approach to treatment.
Geoff Sher
Dear Dr. Sher, I just had a failed IUI (first cycle) and getting ready for the second. But this month my periods are somewhat different, I passed two tissues same way as I had it in my second miscarriage. I now want to get my and my husband’s anti-bodies done. can you tell me the name of the tests please. My fallopian tubes are fine, prolactin is at a higher side but improved with medicines, my egg matures @21mm on day 14th, TB-PCR came negative. however, my ET always comes thickened (10.5mm on day 2 of period). Can thickened ET be the cause of my miscarriages?
When it comes to reproduction, humans are the poorest performers of all mammals. In fact we are so inefficient that up to 75% of fertilized eggs do not produce live births, and up to 30% of pregnancies end up being lost within 10 weeks of conception (in the first trimester). RPL is defined as two (2) or more failed pregnancies. Less than 5% of women will experience two (2) consecutive miscarriages, and only 1% experience three or more.
Pregnancy loss can be classified by the stage of pregnancy when the loss occurs:
•Early pregnancy loss (first trimester)
•Late pregnancy loss (after the first trimester)
•Occult “hidden” and not clinically recognized, (chemical) pregnancy loss (occurs prior to ultrasound confirmation of pregnancy)
•Early pregnancy losses usually occur sporadically (are not repetitive).
In more than 70% of cases the loss is due to embryo aneuploidy (where there are more or less than the normal quota of 46 chromosomes). Conversely, repeated losses (RPL), with isolated exceptions where the cause is structural (e.g., unbalanced translocations), are seldom attributable to numerical chromosomal abnormalities (aneuploidy). In fact, the vast majority of cases of RPL are attributable to non-chromosomal causes such as anatomical uterine abnormalities or Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID).
Since most sporadic early pregnancy losses are induced by chromosomal factors and thus are non-repetitive, having had a single miscarriage the likelihood of a second one occurring is no greater than average. However, once having had two losses the chance of a third one occurring is double (35-40%) and after having had three losses the chance of a fourth miscarriage increases to about 60%. The reason for this is that the more miscarriages a woman has, the greater is the likelihood of this being due to a non-chromosomal (repetitive) cause such as IID. It follows that if numerical chromosomal analysis (karyotyping) of embryonic/fetal products derived from a miscarriage tests karyotypically normal, then by a process of elimination, there would be a strong likelihood of a miscarriage repeating in subsequent pregnancies and one would not have to wait for the disaster to recur before taking action. This is precisely why we strongly advocate that all miscarriage specimens be karyotyped.
There is however one caveat to be taken into consideration. That is that the laboratory performing the karyotyping might unwittingly be testing the mother’s cells rather than that of the conceptus. That is why it is not possible to confidently exclude aneuploidy in cases where karyotyping of products suggests a “chromosomally normal” (euploid) female.
Late pregnancy losses (occurring after completion of the 1st trimester/12th week) occur far less frequently (1%) than early pregnancy losses. They are most commonly due to anatomical abnormalities of the uterus and/or cervix. Weakness of the neck of the cervix rendering it able to act as an effective valve that retains the pregnancy (i.e., cervical incompetence) is in fact one of the commonest causes of late pregnancy loss. So also are developmental (congenital) abnormalities of the uterus (e.g., a uterine septum) and uterine fibroid tumors. In some cases intrauterine growth retardation, premature separation of the placenta (placental abruption), premature rupture of the membranes and premature labor can also causes of late pregnancy loss.
Much progress has been made in understanding the mechanisms involved in RPL. There are two broad categories:
1.Problems involving the uterine environment in which a normal embryo is prohibited from properly implanting and developing. Possible causes include:
•Inadequate thickening of the uterine lining
•Irregularity in the contour of the uterine cavity (polyps, fibroid tumors in the uterine wall, intra-uterine scarring and adenomyosis)
•Hormonal imbalances (progesterone deficiency or luteal phase defects). This most commonly results in occult RPL.
•Deficient blood flow to the uterine lining (thin uterine lining).
•Immunologic implantation dysfunction (IID). A major cause of RPL. Plays a role in 75% of cases where chromosomally normal preimplantation embryos fail to implant.
•Interference of blood supply to the developing conceptus can occur due to a hereditary clotting disorder known as Thrombophilia.
2.Genetic and/or structural chromosomal abnormality of the embryo.Genetic abnormalities are rare causes of RPL. Structural chromosomal abnormalities are slightly more common but are also occur infrequently (1%). These are referred to as unbalanced translocation and they result from part of one chromosome detaching and then fusing with another chromosome. Additionally, a number of studies suggest the existence of paternal (sperm derived) effect on human embryo quality and pregnancy outcome that are not reflected as a chromosomal abnormality. Damaged sperm DNA can have a negative impact on fetal development and present clinically as occult or early clinical miscarriage. The Sperm Chromatin Structure Assay (SCSA) which measures the same endpoints are newer and possibly improved methods for evaluating.
IMMUNOLOGIC IMPLANTATION DYSFUNCTION
Autoimmune IID: Here an immunologic reaction is produced by the individual to his/her body’s own cellular components. The most common antibodies that form in such situations are APA and antithyroid antibodies (ATA).
But it is only when specialized immune cells in the uterine lining, known as cytotoxic lymphocytes (CTL) and natural killer (NK) cells, become activated and start to release an excessive/disproportionate amount of TH-1 cytokines that attack the root system of the embryo, that implantation potential is jeopardized. Diagnosis of such activation requires highly specialized blood test for cytokine activity that can only be performed by a handful of reproductive immunology reference laboratories in the United States.
Alloimmune IID, i.e., where antibodies are formed against antigens derived from another member of the same species, is believed to be a relatively common immunologic cause of recurrent pregnancy loss.
Autoimmune IID is often genetically transmitted. Thus it should not be surprising to learn that it is more likely to exist in women who have a family (or personal) history of primary autoimmune diseases such as lupus erythematosus (LE), scleroderma or autoimmune hypothyroidism (Hashimoto’s disease), autoimmune hyperthyroidism (Grave’s disease), rheumatoid arthritis, etc. Reactionary (secondary) autoimmunity can occur in conjunction with any medical condition associated with widespread tissue damage. One such gynecologic condition is endometriosis. Since autoimmune IID is usually associated with activated NK and T-cells from the outset, it usually results in such very early destruction of the embryo’s root system that the patient does not even recognize that she is pregnant. Accordingly the condition usually presents as “unexplained infertility” or “unexplained IVF failure” rather than as a miscarriage.
Alloimmune IID, on the other hand, usually starts off presenting as unexplained miscarriages (often manifesting as RPL). Over time as NK/T cell activation builds and eventually becomes permanently established the patient often goes from RPL to “infertility” due to failed implantation. RPL is more commonly the consequence of alloimmune rather than autoimmune implantation dysfunction.
However, regardless, of whether miscarriage is due to autoimmune or alloimmune implantation dysfunction the final blow to the pregnancy is the result of activated NK cells and CTL in the uterine lining that damage the developing embryo’s “root system” (trophoblast) so that it can no longer sustain the growing conceptus. This having been said, it is important to note that autoimmune IID is readily amenable to reversal through timely, appropriately administered, selective immunotherapy, and alloimmune IID is not. It is much more difficult to treat successfully, even with the use of immunotherapy. In fact, in some cases the only solution will be to revert to selective immunotherapy plus using donor sperm (provided there is no “match” between the donor’s DQa profile and that of the female recipient) or alternatively to resort to gestational surrogacy.
DIAGNOSING THE CAUSE OF RPL
In the past, women who miscarried were not evaluated thoroughly until they had lost several pregnancies in a row. This was because sporadic miscarriages are most commonly the result of embryo numerical chromosomal irregularities (aneuploidy) and thus not treatable. However, a consecutive series of miscarriages points to a repetitive cause that is non-chromosomal and is potentially remediable. Since RPL is most commonly due to a uterine pathology or immunologic causes that are potentially treatable, it follows that early chromosomal evaluation of products of conception could point to a potentially treatable situation. Thus I strongly recommend that such testing be done in most cases of miscarriage. Doing so will avoid a great deal of unnecessary heartache for many patients.
Establishing the correct diagnosis is the first step toward determining effective treatment for couples with RPL. It results from a problem within the pregnancy itself or within the uterine environment where the pregnancy implants and grows. Diagnostic tests useful in identifying individuals at greater risk for a problem within the pregnancy itself include:
•Karyotyping (chromosome analysis) both prospective parents
•Assessment of the karyotype of products of conception derived from previous miscarriage specimens
•Ultrasound examination of the uterine cavity after sterile water is injected or sonohysterogram, fluid ultrasound, etc.)
•Hysterosalpingogram (dye X-ray test)
•Hysteroscopic evaluation of the uterine cavity
•Full hormonal evaluation (estrogen, progesterone, adrenal steroid hormones, thyroid hormones, FSH/LH, etc.)
•Immunologic testing to include:
a)Antiphospholipid antibody (APA) panel
b)Antinuclear antibody (ANA) panel
c)Antithyroid antibody panel (i.e., antithyroglobulin and antimicrosomal antibodies)
d)Reproductive immunophenotype
e)Natural killer cell activity (NKa) assay (i.e., K562 target cell test)
f)Alloimmune testing of both the male and female partners
TREATMENT OF RPL
Treatment for Anatomic Abnormalities of the Uterus: This involves restoration through removal of local lesions such as fibroids, scar tissue, and endometrial polyps or timely insertion of a cervical cerclage (a stitch placed around the neck of the weakened cervix) or the excision of a uterine septum when indicated.
Treatment of Thin Uterine Lining: A thin uterine lining has been shown to correlate with compromised pregnancy outcome. Often this will be associated with reduced blood flow to the endometrium. Such decreased blood flow to the uterus can be improved through treatment with sildenafil and possibly aspirin.
Sildenafil (Viagra) Therapy. Viagra has been used successfully to increase uterine blood flow. However, to be effective it must be administered starting as soon as the period stops up until the day of ovulation and it must be administered vaginally (not orally). Viagra in the form of vaginal suppositories given in the dosage of 25 mg four times a day has been shown to increase uterine blood flow as well as thickness of the uterine lining. To date, we have seen significant improvement of the thickness of the uterine lining in about 70% of women treated. Successful pregnancy resulted in 42% of women who responded to the Viagra. It should be remembered that most of these women had previously experienced repeated IVF failures.
Use of Aspirin: This is an anti-prostaglandin that improves blood flow to the endometrium. It is administered at a dosage of 81 mg orally, daily from the beginning of the cycle until ovulation.
Treating Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction with Selective Immunotherapy: Modalities such as IL/IVIg, heparinoids (Lovenox/Clexane), and corticosteroids (dexamethasone, prednisone, prednisolone) can be used in select cases depending on autoimmune or alloimmune dysfunction.
The Use of IVF in the Treatment of RPL
In the following circumstances, IVF is the preferred option:
1.When in addition to a history of RPL, another standard indication for IVF (e.g., tubal factor, endometriosis, and male factor infertility) is superimposed.
2.In cases where selective immunotherapy is needed to treat an immunologic implantation dysfunction.
The reason for IVF being a preferred approach in such cases is that in order to be effective, the immunotherapy needs to be initiated well before spontaneous or induced ovulation. Given the fact that the anticipated birthrate per cycle of COS with or without IUI is at best about 15%, it follows that short of IVF, to have even a reasonable chance of a live birth, most women with immunologic causes of RPL would need to undergo immunotherapy repeatedly, over consecutive cycles. Conversely, with IVF, the chance of a successful outcome in a single cycle of treatment is several times greater and, because of the attenuated and concentrated time period required for treatment, IVF is far safer and thus represents a more practicable alternative
Since embryo aneuploidy is a common cause of miscarriage, the use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), with tests such as CGH, can provide a valuable diagnostic and therapeutic advantage in cases of RPL. PGD requires IVF to provide access to embryos for testing.
There are a few cases of intractable alloimmune dysfunction due to absolute DQ alpha matching where Gestational Surrogacy or use of donor sperm could represent the only viable recourse, other than abandoning treatment altogether and/or resorting to adoption. Other non-immunologic factors such as an intractably thin uterine lining or severe uterine pathology might also warrant that last resort consideration be given to gestational surrogacy.
The good news is that if a couple with RPL is open to all of the diagnostic and treatment options referred to above, a live birthrate of 70%–80% is ultimately achievable.
Feel free to call 702-533-2691 if you would like to set up a Skype consultation to discuss your case with me.
Geoff Sher