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. Hi Dr Sher, is it possible to get pregnant through intercourse when doing an embryo transfer (I will be taking Estrogen on CD2 and progesterone later). Many thanks in advance!

  2. Hi Dr Sher, what is your opinion on day 3 vs day 5 transfers?

    • Embryo transfer (ET) is undoubtedly a rate limiting factor when it comes to IVF outcome. In fact, in my opinion, it is the single most important procedural step in IVF. Optimal performance of ET takes practice, confidence, dexterity, timing, gentility and skill. Of all the hands-on procedures involved in the IVF process, embryo transfer is by far the most difficult to teach. In fact, any women fail to conceive simply because the practicing physician did (could) not perform this procedure optimally.

      The issue of whether it is better to transfer early (day 2-3,post fertilization) cleaved embryos rather than (day 5-6) blastocysts continues to rage. Here I wish to focus on the reasons why I favor transferring blastocysts.

      Not too long ago, it was believed that the sooner an embryo was transferred into the “natural environment” of the uterus, the greater would be the chance of it implanting and propagating a viable pregnancy. Thus most IVF physicians advocated day 2 or day 3 embryo transfers preferentially. About 20 years ago, we began to realize that there was no validity to the belief that an embryo would develop better and have a greater chance of propagating a baby by being inside the uterus earlier than it would by being allowed to first develop into a blastocyst in an incubator. About a decade later, it was realized that cleaved embryos that fail to develop into blastocysts are with few exceptions numerically chromosomally “incompetent” (aneuploid) such that had they been transferred earlier, they almost certainly would not have developed into blastocysts and would not have propagated a pregnancy anyway. Now most of us practicing in this field believe it to be preferential to selectively transfer blastocysts rather than earlier cleaved embryos. Don’t get me wrong! I am not saying that there is never a place for doing earlier pre-blastocyst transfers. Patients that only have one or two cleaved embryos available might as well transfer them early.

      The recent popularization of full preimplantation genetic sampling (PGS) using methods such as comparative genomic hybridization (CGH), next generation gene sequencing (NGS) and SNP array, now allow us to identify those blastocysts that are the most “competent”. Selective transfer of such embryos improves the implantation rate per embryo by a factor of 2-3.

      It is important to bear in mind that morphologically good looking day 3 embryos/blastocysts that are determined microscopically to be of a “high grade” , are by no means always numerically chromosomally “competent” euploid , and the likelihood of such embryos being “competent” diminishes progressively with advancing age of the woman. Only through the performance of full PGS can his age-related discrepancy be reduced.

      While it would be acceptable to me to transfer 2 PGS-untested blastocysts to women under 39 years, and to transfer 3 to older women, I would not recommend transferring more than 2 PGS-normal embryos at any age.

      The following are arguments in favor of performing blastocysts transfers:
      •By waiting to day 5-6 many unworthy, many aneuploid and “incompetent” embryos can be culled out, thereby allowing for the transfer of fewer embryos and minimizing the risk of high order multiple pregnancies.
      •Diagnostic Advantages:
      o Failure of the expected number of cleaved embryos to advance to the blastocyst stage of development in culture, raises the suspicion of underlying inherent embryo “incompetence”, which is usually (but not exclusively) egg-related rather than due to a sperm factor. While age of the woman is the most important factor involved, it can also be due to the wrong protocol of ovarian stimulation being used).
      oIt facilitates the performance of PGS to identify and then selectively transfer only most “competent” (euploid) blastocysts. In such cases, provided there is no underlying uterine implantation dysfunction implantation and pregnancy rate is enhanced significantly.

      Of course, for the treating physician it is far less stressful not have to have to confront a patient with her having no surviving embryos to transfer. The avoidance of this has in my opinion, in the past, been one of the main reasons why IVF practitioners have elected to transfer cleaved embryos rather than blastocysts. But such a policy is usually not in the in the patients’ best interest. In my opinion, it is far better to advise the patient to do a blastocyst transfer since that is almost always in their best interest.

      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.
      •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

      If you are interested in seeking my advice or services, 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.

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

      Geoffrey Sher

  3. Can you use a combination of clomid and fostimon from day 2, on an ivf cycle to produce more follicles?

    • You can but I personally never use clomiphene in IVF. Whenever you do so the results are poorer….in my opinion!

      Geoff Sher

  4. I’m 33, husband is 35. We have been TTC for 2 years and are unexplained. We have never had a positive pregnancy, MC or CP. I started seeing my OB 6 months in due to mid-cycle spotting. A year ago I had polyps removed and then started Clomid for 1 month, femara for 3 more (my lining didn’t respond well to clomid), then we did 3 IUI cycles with Femara and HCG trigger. Had another HSG after 2nd IUI at my request, everything was normal. Right before our IVF cycle, I was told that I am in the low range of “Normal” AMH levels and so my RE prescribed a protocol involving Lupron, dexamethasone, then Menopur, Gonal F (475/day) in my stimulation phase. We had around 18 follicles, 11 eggs retrieved, 9 fertilized with ICSI, 8 blastocysts, 6 PGS normal, 3 A/B, 1 B/A, 2 BB grades. Because our embryos did so well, I am now concerned that our issue will be or has been implantation all this time. My RE suspects endometriosis, but to my knowledge has never seen any indications. I do have heavy/miserable cycles but they have lightened up recently, though the sickest I’ve ever been was last summer before getting my polyps removed. My lining has always been great with the exception of my cycle on clomid. My husband has great numbers on all SA’s thus far. I had marginally low Prolactin levels but they fluctuate between barely too low and normal and so we eliminated that possibility early on (before finding the polyps). During TI & IUI cycle monitoring, we noticed that my left ovary rarely ovulated. My RE will put me on Estradiol & POI for FET but I feel as though that is just standard protocol and worry that not getting individualized care will jeopardize this transfer. I’ve heard of Neupogen for transfers, scrapes, ERA. I’m wondering if I need to be more aggressive in getting answers and tackling individualized solutions before our first FET. What would you recommend? We had to ask about PGS (I have a family history of heart problems but no precise genetic condition has been identified) and while it turned out that we had a lot of our embryos turn out great, I was a little frustrated that this was not recommended to us in our plan of care. I certainly don’t want to tell the specialists how to do their jobs but I want to be sure that I’m being a good advocate for my future family. Thank you so much in advance!

    • This really sounds like3 an implantation dysfunction. You should know that 1/3 of women with endometriosis (regardless of its severity) will have an immunologic implantation dysfunction linked to NK cell activation.

      More than half of women who have endometriosis harbor antiphospholipid antibodies (APA) that can compromise development of the embryo’s root system (trophoblast). In addition and far more serious, is the fact that in about one third of cases endometriosis, regardless of its severity is associated with NKa and cytotoxic uterine lymphocytes (CTL) which can seriously jeopardize implantation. This immunologic implantation dysfunction (IID) is diagnosed by testing the woman’s blood for APA, for NKa (using the K-562 target cell test or by endometrial biopsy for cytokine activity) and, for CTL (by a blood immunophenotype). Activated NK cells attack the invading trophoblast cells (developing “root system” of the embryo/early conceptus) as soon as it tries to gain attachment to the uterine wall. In most cases, this results in rejection of the embryo even before the pregnancy is diagnosed and sometimes, in a chemical pregnancy or an early miscarriage. As such, many women with endometriosis, rather than being infertile, in the strict sense of the word, often actually experience repeated undetected “mini-miscarriages”.
      Women who harbor APA’s often experience improved IVF birth rates when heparinoids (Clexane/Lovenox) are administered from the onset of ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins until the 10th week of pregnancy. NKa is treated with a combination of Intralipid (IL) and steroid therapy: Intralipid (IL) is a solution of small lipid droplets suspended in water. When administered intravenously, IL provides essential fatty acids, linoleic acid (LA), an omega-6 fatty acid, alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), an omega-3 fatty acid.IL is made up of 20% soybean oil/fatty acids (comprising linoleic acid, oleic acid, palmitic acid, linolenic acid and stearic acid) , 1.2% egg yolk phospholipids (1.2%), glycerin (2.25%) and water (76.5%).IL exerts a modulating effect on certain immune cellular mechanisms largely by down-regulating NKa.
      The therapeutic effect of IL/steroid therapy is likely due to an ability to suppress pro-inflammatory cellular (Type-1) cytokines such as interferon gamma and TNF-alpha. IL/steroids down-regulates NKa within 2-3 weeks of treatment the vast majority of women experiencing immunologic implantation dysfunction. In this regard IL is just as effective as Intravenous Gamma globulin (IVIg) but at a fraction of the cost and with a far lower incidence of side-effects. Its effect lasts for 4-9 weeks when administered in early pregnancy.
      The toxic pelvic environment caused by endometriosis, profoundly reduces natural fertilization potential. As a result normally ovulating infertile women with endometriosis and patent Fallopian tubes are much less likely to conceive naturally, or by using fertility agents alone (with or without intrauterine (IUI) insemination. The only effective way to bypass this adverse pelvic environment is through IVF. I am not suggesting here that all women who have endometriosis require IVF! Rather, I am saying that in cases where the condition is further compromised by an IID associated with NKa and/or for older women(over 35y) who have diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) where time is of the essence, it is my opinion that IVF is the treatment of choice.

      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).
      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.
      •Ovarian Stimulation in Women Who have Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR): Introducing the Agonist/Antagonist Conversion protocol
      •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
      •IVF: How Many Attempts should be considered before Stopping?
      •“Unexplained” Infertility: Often a matter of the Diagnosis Being Overlooked!
      •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:
      •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
      If you are interested in seeking my advice or services, 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 .

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

      Geoffrey Sher MD

  5. Hi Dr Sher, what is your opinion on fresh vs FET? I did a mild IVF cycle (with only 200iu of Gonal F and Cetrotide). I was told FET is normally better but since the stimulation is so mild it wouldn’t make much difference whether I do fresh or FET. Which would you recommend? What factors would you consider when trying to decide between the two?

    • Until less than a decade ago, most women undergoing IVF would have their embryos transferred to the uterus in the same cycle that the egg retrieval was performed (“Fresh” Embryo Transfer). This was because embryo cryopreservation (freezing) was a hazardous undertaking. In fact it resulted in about 30% not surviving the freezing process and those that did, having about one half the potential of “fresh embryos to implant and propagate a viable pregnancy. The main reason for the high attrition rate associated with embryo cryopreservation is that the “conventional” freezing” process that was done slowly and this resulted in ice forming within the embryo’s cells, damaging or destroying them. The recent introduction of an ultra-rapid cryopreservation process known as vitrification freezes the embryos so rapidly as to avoid ice crystals from developing. As a result, >90% survive the freeze/thaw process in as good a condition as they were prior to being frozen and thus without being compromised in their ability to propagate a viable pregnancy.
      Recently, there have been several articles that have appeared in the literature suggest that an altered hormonal environment may be the reason for this effect. There have also been reports showing that when singletons (pregnancy with one baby) conceived naturally are compared to singletons conceived through a “fresh” embryo transfers they tend to have a greater chance of low birth weight/prematurity. This difference was not observed in babies born following FET. Hence, there is a suspicion that the altered hormonal environment during the fresh cycle may be the causative factor.
      Available evidence suggests that FET (of pre-vitrified blastocysts) is at least as successful as is the transfer of “fresh” embryos and might even have the edge. The reason for this is certainly unlikely to have anything to do with the freezing process itself. The reason likely has to do with being able to better able to prepare the uterus optimally for embryo implantation by using targeted hormone replacement therapy that when a “fresh” transfer is performed immediately following ovarian stimulation with fertility drugs.
      There are additional factors other than method used for embryo cryopreservation that influence outcome following FET. These include
      •An emerging trend towards selective transferring only advanced (day 5-6) embryos (blastocysts).
      • (PGS) to allow for the selective transfer of genetic competent (euploid) embryos
      •Addressing underlying causes of implantation dysfunction (anatomical and immunologic uterine factors) and
      • Exclusive use of ultrasound guidance for delivery of embryos transferred to the uterus.

      Against this background, the use of FET has several decided advantages:
      •The ability to cryostore surplus embryos left over after fresh embryo transfer
      •The ability to safely hold embryos over for subsequent transfer in a later frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycle (i.e. Staggered IVF) in cases where:
      1.Additional time is needed to perform preimplantation Genetic testing for embryo competency.
      2.In cases where ovarian hyperstimulation increases the risk of life-endangering complications associated with critically severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).
      3.To bank (stockpile) embryos for selective transfer of karyotypically normal embryos in older women or those who are diminished ovarian reserve
      4.The ability to store embryos in cases of IVF with third party parenting (Egg Donation; Gestational Surrogacy and Embryo donation) and so improve convenience for those couples seeking such services.
      Preimplantation Genetic Sampling with FET:
      The introduction of preimplantation genetic sampling (PGS) to karyotyping of embryos for selective transfer of the most “competent” embryos, requires in most cases that the tested blastocysts be vitribanked while awaiting test results and then transferred to the uterus at a later date. Many IVF programs have advocated the routine use of PGS in IVF purported to improve IVF outcome. But PGS should in my opinion should only be used selectively. I do not believe that it is needed for all women undergoing IVF. First there is the significant additional cost involved and second it will not benefit everyone undergoing IVF, in my opinion.
      While PGS is a good approach for older women and those with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) and also for woman who experience recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) or “unexplained” recurrent IVF failure recent data suggests that it will not improve IVF success rates in women under 36Y who have normal ovarian reserve, who represent the majority of women seeking IVF treatment. Nor is it needed in women (regardless of their age) undergoing IVF with eggs donated by a younger donor. This is because in such women about 1:2/3 of their eggs/embryos are usually chromosomally normal, and in most cases will upon fertilization produce multiple blastocysts per IVF attempt, anyway. Thus in such cases the transfer of 2 blastocysts will likely yield the same outcome regardless of whether the embryos had been subjected to PGS or not. The routine use of
      It is another matter when it comes to women who have diminished ovarian reserve and/or DOR contemplating embryo banking and for women with unexplained recurrent IVF failure, recurrent pregnancy loss and women with alloimmune implantation dysfunction who regardless of their age or ovarian reserve require PGS for diagnostic reasons.
      Embryo Banking: Some IVF centers are doing embryo banking cycles with Preimplantation Genetic Screening (PGS). With Embryo Banking” several IVF cycles are performed sequentially (usually about 2 months apart), up to the egg retrieval stage. The eggs are fertilized and the resulting advanced embryos are biopsied. The biopsy specimens are held over until enough 4-8 blastocysts have been vitribanked, thus providing a reasonable likelihood that one or more will turn out to be PGS-normal. At this point the biopsy specimens (derived all banking cycles) are sent for PGS testing at one time (a significant cost-saver), the chromosomally normal blastocysts are identified and the women are scheduled for timed FET procedures….. with a good prospect of a markedly improved chance of success as well as a reduced risk of miscarriage.

      Geoff Sher