Ask Our Doctors – Archive

Our Medical Directors are outstanding physicians that you will find to be very personable and compassionate, who take care to ensure that you have the most cutting-edge fertility treatments at your disposal. This is your outlet to ask your questions to the doctors.

19,771 Comments

  1. Hello,
    I will be having a FET in 6 days and my lining was checked today. I was told its 12 mm. I’m wondering is it possible that it will get too thick in 6 days by the time I have the transfer? The transfer will be a 5 day embryo. Thank you.

    • In the absence of endometrial pathology (rare), there is in my opinion, no such thing as an over-thick lining!

      Geoff Sher

  2. Hello Dr Sher, I am 43 years of age and had embryo transfer yesterday (3 day 3 transfers). After laying down in the clinic after the procedure for about 45 minutes, I walked to the car and drove home (about 20 minutes drive). It was very hot and sunny here yesterday. Until the air conditioning started cooling the car, the temperature in the car was about 110 F given the car was parked in the sun. I am a bit worried – does walking shortly after embryo transfer, driving and most importantly, outside heat (while walking to the car and inside the car), hurt the embryos? I have been a couch potato since I got home yesterday.

    • Should not have any adverse effect Nancy!

      Good luck!

      Geoff Sher

  3. Hi Dr Sher, A face book member asks? What causes an Amh test to change so differently in one year? Last year my amh was 5.21ml and I got my results back from the other day and it’s 3.20ml

    thanks lynn

    • There are natural variations that occur. Also ovarian cysts and possibly even hormonal therapy such as a BCP can do this too!

      Geoff Sher

  4. Hi dr. Sher,
    What do you think about a Decapeptyl depot 3.75mg as a attempt to get more mature eggs in a cycle?
    My AMH is 3.29 ng/ml, FSH 4,7 mIU/ml, LH3,30 mU/ml. Looking forward to hearing from you.

    • It could be fine, but my preference would be daily shots of regular agonist starting about 5 days prior to the period.

      Two main factors determine the quality of a woman’s eggs at ovulation or egg retrieval. First is her age and second is the protocol used for ovarian stimulation. With the possible the exception of cases where there is severe sperm dysfunction, it is the chromosomal integrity of the egg rather than the sperm that will ultimately determine the chromosomal integrity of the embryo (i.e. its “competency”, or its potential to propagate a healthy babies). It therefore follows that the only way by which to influence embryo “competence” is through the selection and implementation of an optimal protocol for ovarian stimulation. Since older women (=35 years) and those who have diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) are at greatest risk of yielding “incompetent” eggs, they are the ones that require special attention. This article will highlight the reasons why such women are the ones most prone to produce poor quality eggs and embryos and how best to address ovarian stimulation in an attempt to minimize this risk.

      Cells that have a full chromosomal component are termed euploid while those that do not, are aneuploid. Most euploid eggs are “competent”, that is, they are the one’s that are most likely to propagate euploid, “competent” embryos. Aneuploid, “incompetent” eggs will invariably develop into aneuploid, “incompetent” embryos. There is a progressive increase in the incidence in egg/embryo aneuploidy with advancing age. To put numbers to the equation; by time a woman reaches 35 yrs; approximately 60% of her eggs are likely to be aneuploid. By the time she reaches her mid 40’s the incidence will be greater than 85%.

      For example, a woman of 43 years would be fortunate if six (6) or eight (8), of her eggs would upon being fertilized, result in one (1) “competent” embryo. As the woman gets older, the inevitable decline in egg/embryo quality results in her having a reduced ability to conceive naturally, a declining IVF success rates, an increase in miscarriages, and a rising incidence of having her baby affected by chromosomal birth defects such as Trisomy 21 (Down’s syndrome). This is why for such a woman, the anticipated IVF birth rate per egg retrieval is less than 10% (i.e. >70% lower than at age 35), the miscarriage rate increases from about 15% at 35y to >40% at age above 40y.and why her risk of having a baby with Down’s syndrome is about 0 2% at 35y as compared to 2% at 44y).

      The anticipation of poor IVF outcome statistics for women in their mid-40’s makes IVF with ovum donation the most rational approach. Yet, in spite of this, many older women still elect to use their own eggs as long as there is even the slightest chance of having their own genetic offspring.

      As a woman approaches and then engages her 40’s, her ability to produce “competent” eggs progressively declines. At the same time she experiences diminishing ovarian reserve that results in a progressive fall-off in the number of eggs she is likely to produce at egg retrieval. As a result, there will be a commensurate drop of in the number of “competent” embryos available for transfer to her uterus.

      The following IVF stimulation protocols are the ones most commonly used for COS in older women and those with DOR:

      1.GnRHa Flare (“Short”) protocol: Some IVF physicians advocate the use of gonadotropin releasing hormone-agonist (GnRHa)- flare protocols in which the administration of GnRHa (e.g. Lupron, Buserelin, Nafarelin, Synarel) therapy begins at the same time that ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins is started (usually with the onset of menstruation). The proposed benefit of such an approach is that the GnRHa will cause the woman’s pituitary gland to release large amounts of follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), which would augment the administered dosage of FSH and thereby synergizing the growth of ovarian follicles.

      The problem associated with this “flare” approach is that concurrent with the GnRHa-induced FSH luteinizing hormone (LH) also surges. In older women and those who have diminished ovarian reserve, the out-pouring of LH can cause the ovarian connective tissue (stroma or theca) which produces excessive male hormones (predominantly, testosterone). While some testosterone is essential for optimal follicle growth, too much testosterone can compromise its development as well as egg/embryo quality. Since older women and women with diminished ovarian reserve often have increased LH production as well as an overgrown of ovarian stroma/theca (i.e. hyperthecosis), a further GnRHa-induced increase in LH can so elevate local ovarian testosterone levels as to severely compromise egg/ embryo “competency”.

      2.Combined Clomiphene or Letrazole) /Gonadotropin Stimulation: This approach when used in older women and women with diminished ovarian reserve is also potentially harmful to egg/embryo quality. The reason is that like GnRHa, clomiphene and Letrazole also cause LH to be released in large amounts. Since these medications are given at the start of ovarian stimulation they, as with “flare protocols” can elicit ovarian over-production of testosterone. As such this approach is in my opinion far less than ideal for older women and women who have diminished ovarian reserve.

      3.Mid-follicular GnRH-antagonist protocol: With this approach, stimulation with gonadotropins is commenced with the onset of the cycle. Then, several days later, once the majority of follicles have reached about 12mm in size, GnRH antagonist (e.g. Ganirelix, Cetrotide, Cetrorelix, and Orgalutron) is added. The intent in adding the antagonist is to abruptly block pituitary LH release and so prevent a “premature LH surge” with its effect of causing increased ovarian testosterone and impaired follicle and egg development.

      The problem with such a regime is that women with diminished ovarian reserve already have too much of their own LH around at the beginning of the cycle. Accordingly, blocking LH release only 6-7 days into the stimulation does nothing to prevent the early adverse effects of too much LH-induced ovarian testosterone on early egg/embryo development. It should be borne in mind that eggs are often at their most vulnerable, early on in the cycle. Thus, in my opinion such protocols are also less than optimal for older women and for those with diminished ovarian reserve.

      4.GnRHa (“Long”) Pituitary down-Regulation Protocol:

      a)The “Standard” Long Protocol Approach: This protocol, which is the mainstay of ovarian stimulation for IVF, is either initiated about 1 week after natural ovulation (a “luteal phase start”) or is launched off a monophasic birth control pill (a “BCP start”). In the case of the latter, the BCP is taken for at least 8 days before, GnRHa (e.g. Lupron/Superfact/Buserelin) is added daily. Two days after starting the GnRHa, the BCP is stopped. Menstruation usually ensues within 3-5 days. GnRHa administration is continued and gonadotropin (Follistim/Gonal-F/Puregon, Bravelle, and Menopur) stimulation is initiated. Both daily Gonadotropin stimulation and GnRHa are continued until the day of the “hCG trigger”.

      The initial administration of agonist serves to rapidly expunge pituitary FSH and LH causing an immediate rise in the blood levels of both hormones. Then, within a few days, having virtually exhausted/depleted pituitary gonadotropin stores, the blood levels of FSH and LH both rapidly decline, such that by the time menstruation occurs, the levels are very low. The initial premenstrual GnRHa-induced rise in FSH helps recruit ovarian antral follicles for the upcoming cycle, while the ultimate virtual depletion of LH serves to prevent excessive ovarian testosterone production and protects egg quality.

      I prefer to use pure FSHr (Folistim, Puregon, Gonal F) for ovarian stimulation for IVF with the initial dosage being reduced by about 25% within a few days. Thereupon 75U Menopur is added daily, up until the hCG trigger.

      b)Modified Long Protocols:
      i.Agonist/Antagonist Conversion protocol (A/ACP): Agonists might competitively inhibit follicle response to FSH. Therefore, in an attempt to improve follicle response to FSH we modified the “standard approach” (a- above) as follows: Rather than continuing to give GnRHa throughout the stimulation protocol, we here supplant GnRHa with low dosage GnRH antagonist starting with the initiation of menstruation, continuing throughout stimulation until the day of the “hCG trigger” at which point both the antagonist and gonadotropins are discontinued. We have had very good results using the A/ACP modification of the “standard long pituitary down-regulation protocol”. In fact it has become my preferred approach for most women with a normal ovarian reserve, who undergo ovarian stimulation for IVF.

      ii.Agonist/Antagonist Conversion Protocol (A/ACP) +“Estrogen Priming” (LA10-E2V): Estrogen primes follicle FSH receptors, thereby enhancing response to FSH. This forms the basis of the “estrogen priming” approach in women with diminished ovarian response. The approach involves administering estradiol by daily injection, or by skin patch starting about 10 days prior to initiating high dosage gonadotropin stimulation. As with the standard A/ACP, the estrogen priming protocol is initiated a week post-ovulation (luteal phase start) or is launched off a birth control pill regime of at least 10 days. It also starts with GnRHa administration for about 5 days whereupon menstruation ensues and the agonist is supplanted by an antagonist. But this is where things change slightly such that instead of directly initiating FSHr (Follistim/Gonal-F/Puregon) injections, the patient, while continuing to take the GnRH antagonist now receives twice weekly estradiol valerate injections or daily estradiol skin patches (I prefer the former) for a period of about 10 days. Thereupon, daily high dosage FSHr (750U) is administered once daily. Four to five days later, 75U Menopur daily is added. “Estrogen priming” is continued until more than 50% of the follicles are at least 12mm in size whereupon it is discontinued.

      5. Mini-IVF or Natural Cycle IVF for women with DOR? It is quite understandable that many women with DOR are easily persuaded that less (or no) ovarian stimulation offers a more “natural” and less “stressful” approach on eggs than a robust, high gonadotropin-based, long-pituitary down regulation approach. This, in my opinion is a fallacy and can compromise rather than benefit IVF outcome in such cases. Even in young women in their early or mid-30’s, the IVF success rate per fresh “natural” or “mini” IVF cycle is much lower (<15%) than that which can be achieved through the use of conventional long down-regulation protocols, where the anticipated success is at least double this rate (30%). Mini-IVF is usually conducted using clomiphene or Femara, alone or in combination with Menopur, all of which is associated with the production of excessive LH-induced ovarian testosterone. Furthermore, low dosage stimulation will result in fewer eggs being available, thus further reducing the odds of IVF success per egg retrieval conducted. Natural cycle IVF is in my opinion also not in the best interest of women with DOR, because with such an approach, nothing is done to control the exaggerated production of LH by the woman’s own pituitary gland.

      Addendum:
      Human Growth Hormone (HGH) Supplementation. Recently, I began selectively adding human growth hormone (HGH) supplementation to simulation protocols in women with DOR, in cases where there is a history of the woman repeatedly producing poor quality eggs and in older women (>38Y) undergoing IVF. There is evidence that this might enhance mitochondrial activity and thus improve egg maturational division (meiosis).

      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.
      •The IVF Journey: The importance of “Planning the Trip” Before Taking the Ride”
      •Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) for IVF: Selecting the ideal protocol
      •IVF: Factors Affecting Egg/Embryo “competency” during Controlled Ovarian Stimulation(COS)
      •The Fundamental Requirements For Achieving Optimal IVF Success
      •Use of GnRH Antagonists (Ganirelix/Cetrotide/Orgalutron) in IVF-Ovarian Stimulation Protocols.
      •Anti Mullerian Hormone (AMH) Measurement to Assess Ovarian Reserve and Design the Optimal Protocol for Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in IVF.
      •The “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)
      •Ovarian Stimulation in Women Who have Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR): Introducing the Agonist/Antagonist Conversion protocol
      •Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in Older women and Women who have Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR): A Rational Basis for Selecting a Stimulation Protocol
      •Optimizing Response to Ovarian Stimulation in Women with Compromised Ovarian Response to Ovarian Stimulation: A Personal Approach.
      •Egg Maturation in IVF: How Egg “Immaturity”, “Post-maturity” and “Dysmaturity” Influence IVF Outcome:
      •Commonly Asked Question in IVF: “Why Did so Few of my Eggs Fertilize and, so Many Fail to Reach Blastocyst?”
      •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
      •Should IVF Treatment Cycles be provided uninterrupted or be Conducted in 7-12 Pre-scheduled “Batches” per Year
      •A personalized, stepwise approach to IVF
      ANNOUNCEMENTS:
      1.About my Retirement
      After > 30 years in the field of Assisted Reproduction (AR), the time has finally come for me to contemplate retiring from full-time clinical medicine. If you are interested in my medical services prior to my retirement, I urge you to contact my concierge, Julie Dahan ASAP to set up a Skype or an in-person consultation with me. You can also contact Julie by phone or via email at 702-533-2691/ Julied@sherivf.com. You can also apply online at http://www.SherIVF.com.

      2.The 4th edition of my newest book ,
      “In Vitro Fertilization, the ART of Making Babies” is now available as a down-load through http://www.Amazon.com or from most bookstores and public libraries.

      Geoffrey Sher MD

  5. Hi Dr. Sher,
    I am in the middle of an FET cycle. I’m triggering tonight with ovidrel.
    I have to have 2 moles removed on my upper abdomen on Thursday. They will use lidocaine injected into the site of the moles.
    Do you think I should wait for the mole removal until after I get pregnant and have the baby? I’m worried that the lidocaine will linger in my system or cause my uterine lining to change and the egg not implant.
    The mole removal and the day of transfer will be 5 days apart.

    • I do not think it matters either way!

      Geoff Sher