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 just had a failed FET. The transfer itself was kind of a disaster the doctor told me I had a retroverted uterus and my bladder was too full. I am 38 years old and I have 5 PGS tested normal embryos frozen. I have a unicornuate uterus and my doctor this is the reason for the failed implantation. My lining was 8.6 and my estrogen was 400 a week before transfer. Now my doctor is pushing a surrogate and I am not comfortable or rich enough to afford this luxury. For my FET protocol I injected Delestrogen (0.1 and then 0.2) for 3 weeks before transfer and then a week before transfer I progesterone suppositories and lozenges. My doctor was strongly again me taking baby aspirin, which I thought would help with the blood flow to the uterus.
Would your prescribe a different FET protocol? Do you accept embryos from other clinics (I am a full time teacher, I cannot afford to start completely over with another IVF cycle)? Would a transfer that attempted to deposit the embryo on the side with my connected ovary be possible? Some of the literature I have read stated blood flow is better on the side with the connected ovary. I really hope I am not a lost cause.
A unicornuate uterus is quite capable of hosting a pregnancy and the fact that your uterus is retroverted should not necessarily make an embryo transfer more difficult. We do need to talk.
Until about 15 years we believed that the best and safest way to cryopreserve embryos was by using a slow freezing method. What we subsequently learned was that the slow freezing process caused the formation of intracellular ice and that this, by damaging embryos and compromised their post-thaw survival as well as IVF outcome, significantly. The introduction of ultra-rapid embryo freezing (vitrification) has changed all that. With vitrification, embryos are frozen so fast that ice cannot form and as a result embryos are hardly damaged. In fact, about 90% of pre-vitrified embryos survive the freeze thaw in at least the same state of health as the day they were frozen and upon being transferred to a receptive uterus, have at the very least the same ability to propagate a viable pregnancy as they would have done, had they been transferred fresh. In fact there are many who believe that the post-FET pregnancy rate is now, perhaps even better than with fresh transfers. This is probably due to the fact that optimal hormonal preparation for FET provides the opportunity to better prepare the uterine lining for implantation than when fresh embryo transfers are done where unpredictably erratic levels of steroid hormones along with other potentially harmful byproducts of ovarian stimulation endometrial development might compromise endometrial development and receptivity. Against this background, and in the absence of prejudice, more and more IVF practitioners are freezing embryos for subsequent dispensation in FET cycles.
There are different ways to prepare the uterus for FET. Some authorities favor the use of commercially available oral estradiol products (e.g. Estrace, Progynova), while others recommend transdermal, transvaginal, or subcutaneous/intramuscular estradiol injections. The problem with oral estradiol administration is firstly that anything taken orally will upon gastrointestinal absorption, first pass through the liver (via the venous portal system) before being delivered into the systemic circulation and to the uterus. It is processed in the liver so what reaches the uterus is an altered substance and is substantially watered down. Secondly, the most commonly used form of estradiol, namely Estrace, readily metabolizes into both estradiol and estrone which could be prejudicial to optimal endometrial development. Trans-vaginal (suppositories) and trans-dermal (skin patches) administration also have drawn-backs that relate to erratic and unpredictable absorption issues. In my opinion, the optimal way to administer estrogen for endometrial development in preparation for embryo reception (FET), egg donor-IVF and gestational surrogacy) is through the twice weekly intramuscular administration of (slow release) estradiol (e.g. Delestrogen). This method of estradiol delivery allows for even absorption and is delivered directly to the uterus via the systemic circulation without having first to pass through the liver. I have advocated the use of
Delestrogen for uterine preparation exclusively for more than 20 years. Results are excellent and I see s no reason to change. Here is how I implement the treatment:
It starts with administering an oral contraceptive (OC) to the recipient. This is later overlapped with Lupron daily for 5-6 days. The oral contraceptive is then withdrawn, but the daily Lupron injections are continued until the onset of menstruation at which point the Lupron dosage is reduced and intramuscular (IM) estradiol valerate (Delestrogen) is administered every 3 days. The objective of the estradiol is to achieve and sustain an optimal plasma E2 concentration of 500pg/ml-1,000pg/ml and a 9mm endometrial lining as assessed by ultrasound examination. Intramuscular and/or intravaginal progesterone is administered daily starting about 6 days prior to the FET and continued along with twice weekly IM Delestrogen until the 10th week of pregnancy or until it has been confirmed that the patient is not pregnant.
Daily oral dexamethasone commences with the Lupron start and continues until a negative pregnancy test or until the completion of the 8th week of pregnancy. Then it is tapered down and discontinued. The recipient also receives prophylactic oral antibiotics starting with the initiation of Progesterone therapy, until the day after ET. Usually we would thaw vitrified blastocysts with the objective of having 1, 2 or 3 for transfer; depending on a couple’s stated preference. Commencing on the day following the ET, the patient inserts a vaginal progesterone suppository daily and this is continued until the completion of the 8th week of pregnancy or until a negative pregnancy test.
As an alternative regimen for women who cannot tolerate intramuscular Progesterone (PIO), we prescribe either Crinone vaginal gel or Endometrin vaginal inserts according to protocol. If you’d like to explore one of these options, talk to your physician. For blastocyst FET’s, the blood pregnancy tests are performed 13 days and 15 days after the first progesterone administration is commenced.
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
•
•
Hello Dr. Sher – I am 44 years old and trying to conceive my first child. I had my first IUI at 43 and conceived immediately but miscarried at 8 weeks. My levels – FSH 8.73, estradiol 73, LH 2.82, AMH .67, Inhibin B 169. We moved to IVF – protocol of Gonal-f (450) and micro dose ovidrel, cetrotide midway through. Only achieved 4 follicles at ER, 3 eggs retrieved, 2 fertilized and only one made it to PGS but came back abnormal on 3 separate chromosomes. No issues with sperm (my husband is deployed so we are using frozen) and all of my other tests (tubes, uterus etc) have shown no issues. We are going to try another round of IVF but am confused with the best protocol. My RE is suggesting we start estrogen priming and then a micro dose flare. Since this may be my last chance to try with my own eggs I want to make sure I’m using the best protocol possible for my situation. I am taking supplements – DHEA, CoQ10, Vit D, B vitamins, magnesium and various others. At the time of the IVF I had only been taking them for about a month and a half but it has now been 3 mos. I’m hoping that will help with the egg quality? Do you have a recommendation on the best protocol?
I Sarah,
I had to be a nay sayer but at 44 with diminished ovarian reserve (AMH=0.7) you need to consider egg donation …but I am sure you know that your chances with own eggs are not good. If hwever, you decide that own eggs is your only recourse, then the protocol you have been using and the one you are contemplating using (microdosee flare protocol), is in my opinion not the way to go. Also I would avoid DHEA (see below).
In my opinion, “microdose” (“flare”) Lupron protocols, should best not be used in women with DOR (see below). It surges LH and with it ovarian testosterone as the stimulation begins and this can have a deleterious effect on egg quality/competency…especially in older women and also in women such as yourself who have DOR. You need a modified, robust, long pituitary down-regulation protocol. I would use an agonist/antagonist conversion protocol with human growth hormone (HGH) augmentation and would recommend Staggered IVF with embryo banking of PGS (next generation gene sequencing)-normal blastocysts, to make hay while the sun still shines.
Please visit my new Blog at o to 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
•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)
•The BCP: Does Launching a Cycle of Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS). Coming off the BCP Compromise Response?
•Frozen Embryo Transfer (FET): What Does it Involve?
•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 Sampling (PGS) Using: Next Generation Gene Sequencing (NGS): Method of Choice.
•IVF Failure and Implantation Dysfunction: The Role of Endometrial Thickness, Uterine Pathology and Immunologic Factors
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
Dr. Sher: I am 37 years old and recently went through IVF with PGS testing and achieved pregnancy (we have two chromosomally normal embryos still frozen from the cycle). We saw a normal heartbeat and fetal size at 7 weeks but found out at 10.5 weeks that we lost the pregnancy (baby measured about 7w3d). I have a four year old son, born naturally with no issues conceiving, and have been trying to get pregnant with a second child since I was 35 years old. All of our fertility testing (blood work, HSG, genetic testing, semen analysis) has been normal with no red flags or known issues. We went through three IUI with Clomid cycles prior to IVF and experienced one chemical pregnancy on our first try with no subsequent pregnancies. I’m wondering what makes sense to test since I now have two pregnancy losses in a row and unexplained secondary infertility. Do you have any suggestions?
Whenever a patient fails to achieve a viable pregnancy following embryo transfer (ET), the first question asked is why! Was it simply due to, bad luck?, How likely is the failure to recur in future attempts and what can be done differently, to avoid it happening next time?.
It is an indisputable fact that any IVF procedure is at least as likely to fail as it is to succeed. Thus when it comes to outcome, luck is an undeniable factor. Notwithstanding, it is incumbent upon the treating physician to carefully consider and address the causes of IVF failure before proceeding to another attempt:
1.Age: The chance of a woman under 35Y of age having a baby per embryo transfer is about 35-40%. From there it declines progressively to under 5% by the time she reaches her mid-forties. This is largely due to declining chromosomal integrity of the eggs with advancing age…”a wear and tear effect” on eggs that are in the ovaries from birth.
2.Embryo Quality/”competency (capable of propagating a viable pregnancy)”. As stated, the woman’s age plays a big role in determining egg/embryo quality/”competency”. This having been said, aside from age the protocol used for controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) is the next most important factor. It is especially important when it comes to older women, and women with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) where it becomes essential to be aggressive, and to customize and individualize the ovarian stimulation protocol.
We used to believe that the uterine environment is more beneficial to embryo development than is the incubator/petri dish and that accordingly, the earlier on in development that embryos are transferred to the uterus, the better. To achieve this goal, we used to select embryos for transfer based upon their day two or microscopic appearance (“grade”). But we have since learned that the further an embryo has advanced in its development, the more likely it is to be “competent” and that embryos failing to reach the expanded blastocyst stage within 5-6 days of being fertilized are almost invariably “incompetent” and are unworthy of being transferred. Moreover, the introduction into clinical practice about a decade ago, (by Levent Keskintepe PhD and myself) of Preimplantation Genetic Sampling (PGS), which assesses for the presence of all the embryos chromosomes (complete chromosomal karyotyping), provides another tool by which to select the most “competent” embryos for transfer. This methodology has selective benefit when it comes to older women, women with DOR, cases of unexplained repeated IVF failure and women who experience recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL).
3.The number of the embryos transferred: Most patients believe that the more embryos transferred the greater the chance of success. To some extent this might be true, but if the problem lies with the use of a suboptimal COS protocol, transferring more embryos at a time won’t improve the chance of success. Nor will the transfer of a greater number of embryos solve an underlying embryo implantation dysfunction (anatomical molecular or immunologic).Moreover, the transfer of multiple embryos, should they implant, can and all too often does result in triplets or greater (high order multiples) which increases the incidence of maternal pregnancy-induced complications and of premature delivery with its serious risks to the newborn. It is for this reason that I rarely recommend the transfer of more than 2 embryos at a time and am moving in the direction of advising single embryo transfers …especially when it comes to transferring embryos derived through the fertilization of eggs from young women.
4.Implantation Dysfunction (ID): Implantation dysfunction is a very common (often overlooked) cause of “unexplained” IVF failure. This is especially the case in young ovulating women who have normal ovarian reserve and have fertile partners. Failure to identify, typify, and address such issues is, in my opinion, an unfortunate and relatively common cause of repeated IVF failure in such women. Common sense dictates that if ultrasound guided embryo transfer is performed competently and yet repeated IVF attempts fail to propagate a viable pregnancy, implantation dysfunction must be seriously considered. Yet ID is probably the most overlooked factor. The most common causes of implantation dysfunction are:
a.A“ thin uterine lining”
b.A uterus with surface lesions in the cavity (polyps, fibroids, scar tissue)
c.Immunologic implantation dysfunction (IID)
d.Endocrine/molecular endometrial receptivity issues
Certain causes of infertility are repetitive and thus cannot readily be reversed. Examples include advanced age of the woman; severe male infertility; immunologic infertility associated with alloimmune implantation dysfunction (especially if it is a “complete DQ alpha genetic match between partners plus uterine natural killer cell activation (NKa).
My answer to patients who ask me when is the time to stop undergoing IVF is ….Aside from the weight of the financial burden, the time to stop is when in spite of thorough and comprehensive evaluation, there is no remediable and treatable explanation for repeated failure.
Please visit my new Blog on this very site, http://www.DrGeoffreySherIVF.com, 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
•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)
•The BCP: Does Launching a Cycle of Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS). Coming off the BCP Compromise Response?
•Secondary Infertility: Addressing the Root Causes
•Recurrent Pregnancy Loss (RPL): Why do I keep losing my Pregnancies?
•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
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
Dr. Sher,
My fiancé and I have undergone 2 IVF treatments due to him having had a vasectomy reversal with low sperm count and low motility. I am now 35 years old with a history of Hashimoto’s and Sjogren’s syndrome. I carry the antithyroid, ANA, SSA, and SSB antibodies. I have been tested for many other autoimmune diseases including lupus and antiphospholipid syndrome, which have come back negative.
With my first pregnancy, we found out at 22 weeks that I had AEDF. My baby was born at 25 weeks and devastatingly passed away 36 hours later. The pathology of the placenta was normal. Cause of the AEDF unknown.
This November we underwent IVF and again I became pregnant. Prophylacticly, I was placed on 5 MG of prednisone, baby aspirin, and 5000 units of heparin. We had 2 ultrasounds with a strong heartbeat. At nearly 10 weeks, we went for a routine ultrasound and sadly no heartbeat was found. I underwent a D&C and chromosomes were found to be normal.
My question to you is, is there hope for a successful pregnancy? I know that with the antithyroid and ANA antibodies that my immune system could be potentially causing the problems. Can you offer any guidance for the next round of treatment? Please help…
Thanks,
Lisa
Hi Lisa,
It is highly likely that you have an immunologic implantation dysfunction. While your history suggests an autoimmune cause, there might in fact be an alloimmune factor involved. This is my area orf expertise and I think I can help you, but we would need to talk.
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.
Please visit my new Blog on this very site, http://www.DrGeoffreySherIVF.com, 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)
•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
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
Hi Dr. Sher, I am due to do an FET next month my re has suggested doing my intralipid infusion 7 days before my 5day blast transfer. And then another infusion 2 weeks later. Is 7 days before the transfer ok for the intralipids or should it be 10 to 12 days before like I have read in some of your other posts, or is 7 days ok. Thanks in advance
7 days before ET is probably OK…but 10-14 days is ideal!
Geoff Sher