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.
What are you cycle dates for 2018? They don’t appear on your website.
Please call 800-780-7437 and ask Rochelle Clove RN and Briana Ohel RN. They will help you!
Geoff Sher
I have stage 3 silent endo removed and 3 months later started a cycle with BCP for 6 weeks, then 2 day overlap with agonist (10IU Lupron) which i continued until trigger. 10 days after I started Lupron, I started Gonal F 225 IU and stimmed for 16 days. I triggered with 10,000IU pregnyl. I had 3 follicles in range. 1 was empty, 1 didn’t fertilise and the other became a grade AB hatching blast on day 5, but was PGS abnormal with monosomy 22. In your opinion, do you think it was the protocol or do you think it was likely to be poor quality eggs? I am 41 with an AMH of 1.
Possibly both…poor quality eggs influenced by the protocol used for ovarian stimulation.
Here is the protocol I advise for women, <40Y who have adequate ovarian reserve.
My advice is to use a long pituitary down regulation protocol starting on a BCP, and overlapping it with Lupron 10U daily for three (3) days and then stopping the BCP but continuing on Lupron 10u daily (in my opinion 20U daily is too much) and await a period (which should ensue within 5-7 days of stopping the BCP). At that point an US examination is done along with a baseline measurement of blood estradiol to exclude a functional ovarian cyst and simultaneously, the Lupron dosage is reduced to 5U daily to be continued until the hCG (10,000u) trigger. An FSH-dominant gonadotropin such as Follistim, Puregon or Gonal-f daily is started with the period for 2 days and then the gonadotropin dosage is reduced and a small amount of menotropin (Menopur---no more than 75U daily) is added. This is continued until US and blood estradiol levels indicate that the hCG trigger be given, whereupon an ER is done 36h later. I personally would advise against using Lupron in “flare protocol” arrangement (where the Lupron commences with the onset of gonadotropin administration.
I strongly recommend that you visit https://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.
• 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
• “Triggering” Egg Maturation in IVF: Comparing urine-derived hCG, Recombinant DNA-hCG and GnRH-agonist:
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 MD
Thanks Dr Sher, but I’m not < 40! I'm 41, do you still recommend this for me?
Hi Dr Sher,
I just noticed that you have likely answered 6000 questions. What a kind service you offer.
Can you please help me know how one lab concludes if an embryo is mosaic. Is there a universal grading or is it up to each lab. Wouldn’t all embryos to some degree be mosaic? And would an abnormal embryo that is only a partial but high quality have a higher chance of implanting than a lower grade mosaic blast.
There is no universal grading system.
Morphologic quality of the embryo is helpful but more important is whether it survives to the expanded, cellular blastocyst stage by day 5-6 post-fertilization. Thereupon whether it is chromosomally normal by PGS.
In nmy opinion, it is not possible for any lab to reliable tell you if embryo aneuploidy is or is not a “mosaic phenomenon”. Human embryo development occurs through a process that encompasses reprogramming, sequential cleavage divisions and mitotic chromosome segregation and embryonic genome activation. Chromosomal abnormalities may arise during germ cell and/or preimplantation embryo development, and represents a major cause of early pregnancy loss. About a decade ago, I and an associate, Levent Keskintepe PhD were the first to introduce full embryo karyotyping (identification of all 46 chromosomes) through preimplantation genetic sampling (PGS) as a method by which to selectively transfer only euploid embryos (i.e. those that have a full component of chromosomes) to the uterus. We subsequently reported on a 2-3 fold improvement in implantation and birth rates as well as a significant reduction in early pregnancy loss, following IVF. Since then PGS has grown dramatically in popularity such that it is now widely used throughout the world.
Most IVF programs that offer PGS services, require that all participating patients consent to all their aneuploid embryos (i.e. those with an irregular quota of chromosomes) be disposed of. However, there is now growing evidence to suggest that following embryo transfer, some aneuploid embryos will in the process of ongoing development, convert to the euploid state (i.e. “autocorrection”) and then go on to develop into chromosomally normal offspring. In fact, I am personally aware of several such cases occurring within our IVF network. So clearly , summarily discarding all aneuploid embryos as a matter of routine we are sometimes destroying some embryos that might otherwise have “autocorrected” and gone on to develop into normal offspring.
Thus by discarding aneuploid embryos the possibility exists that we could be denying some women the opportunity of having a baby. This creates a major ethical and moral dilemma for those of us that provide the option of PGS to our patients. On the one hand, we strive “to avoid knowingly doing harm” (the Hippocratic Oath) and as such would prefer to avoid or minimize the risk of miscarriage and/or chromosomal birth defects and on the other hand we would not wish to deny patients with aneuploid embryos, the opportunity to have a baby.
The basis for such embryo “autocorrection” lies in the fact that some embryos found through PGS-karyotyping to harbor one or more aneuploid cells (blastomeres) will often also harbor chromosomally normal (euploid) cells (blastomeres). The coexistence of both aneuploid and euploid cells coexisting in the same embryo is referred to as “mosaicism.” As stated, some mosaic embryos will In the process of subsequent cell replication convert to the normal euploid state (i.e. autocorrect)
It is against this background, that an ever increasing number of IVF practitioners, rather than summarily discard PGS-identified aneuploid embryos are now choosing to cryobanking (freeze-store) certain of them, to leave open the possibility of ultimately transferring them to the uterus. In order to best understand the complexity of the factors involved in such decision making, it is essential to understand the causes of embryo aneuploidy of which there are two varieties:
1.Meiotic aneuploidy” results from aberrations in chromosomal numerical configuration that originate in either the egg (most commonly) and/or in sperm, during preconceptual maturational division (meiosis). Since meiosis occurs in the pre-fertilized egg or in and sperm, it follows that when aneuploidy occurs due to defective meiosis, all subsequent cells in the developing embryo/blastocyst/conceptus inevitably will be aneuploid, precluding subsequent “autocorrection”. Meiotic aneuploidy will thus invariably be perpetuated in all the cells of the embryo as they replicate. It is a permanent phenomenon and is irreversible. All embryos so affected are thus fatally damaged. Most will fail to implant and those that do implant will either be lost in early pregnancy or develop into chromosomally defective offspring (e.g. Down syndrome, Edward syndrome, Turner syndrome).
2.“Mitotic aneuploidy” occurs when following fertilization and subsequent cell replication (cleavage), some cells (blastomeres) of a meiotically euploid early embryo mutate and become aneuploid. This is referred to as mosaicism. Thereupon, with continued subsequent cell replication (mitosis) the chromosomal make-up (karyotype) of the embryo might either comprise of predominantly aneuploid cells or euploid cells. The subsequent viability or competency of the conceptus will thereupon depend on whether euploid or aneuploid cells predominate. If in such mosaic embryos aneuploid cells predominate, the embryo will be “incompetent”). If (as is frequently the case) euploid cells prevail, the mosaic embryo will be “competent” and capable of propagating a normal conceptus.
Since some mitotically aneuploid (“mosaic”) embryos can, and indeed do “autocorrect’ while meiotically aneuploid embryos cannot, it follows that an ability to differentiate between these two varieties of aneuploidy would be of considerable clinical value. And would provide a strong argument in favor of preserving certain aneuploid embryos for future dispensation.
Aneuploidy, involves the addition (trisomy) or subtraction (monosomy) of one chromosome in a given pair. As previously stated, some aneuploidies are meiotic in origin while others are mitotic “mosaics”. Certain aneuploidies involve only a single, chromosome pair (simple aneuploidy) while others involve more than a single pair (i.e. complex aneuploidy). Aside from monosomy involving absence of the y-sex chromosome (i.e. XO) which can resulting in a live birth (Turner syndrome) all monosomies involving autosomes (non-sex chromosomes) are lethal and will not result in viable offspring). Some autosomal meiotic aneuploidies, especially trisomies 13, 18, 21, can progress to viable, but severely chromosomally defective babies. All other meiotic autosomal trisomies will almost invariably, either not attach to the uterine lining or upon attachment, will soon be rejected. All forms of meiotic aneuploidy are irreversible while mitotic aneuploidy (“mosaicism) often autocorrects in the uterus. Most complex aneuploidies are meiotic in origin and will almost invariably fail to propagate viable pregnancies.
There is presently no practical test that can reliable differentiate between meiotic and mitotic aneuploidy. Notwithstanding this, the fact that some “mosaic” embryos can autocorrect in the uterus, makes a strong argument in favor of transferring aneuploid of embryos in the hope that the one(s) transferred might be “mosaic” and might propagate viable healthy pregnancies. On the other hand, it is the fear that embryo aneuploidy might result in a chromosomally abnormal baby that has led many IVF physicians to strongly oppose the transfer of aneuploid embryos to the uterus.
Certain meiotic aneuploid trisomy embryos (e.g. trisomies 13, 18, & 21) can and sometimes do, result in aneuploid concepti. Thus, in my opinion, unless the woman/couple receiving such embryos is willing to commit to terminating a resulting pregnancy found through amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling (CVS) to be so affected, she/they are probably best advised not to transfer such embryos. Other autosomal trisomy embryos will hardly ever produce viable euploid concepti and can thus, in my opinion be transferred in the hope that auto correction will occur in-utero. However, in all cases, and amniocentesis or CVS should be performed to make certain that the baby is euploid. Conversely, no autosomal monosomy embryos are believed to be capable of resulting in viable pregnancies, thereby making the transfer of autosomal monosomy embryos, in the hope that they are “mosaic”, a far less risky proposition. Needless to say, if such action is being contemplated in any such cases, it is absolutely essential to make full disclosure to the patient (s) , and to insure the completion of a detailed informed consent agreement which would include a commitment by the patient (s) to undergo prenatal genetic testing (amniocentesis/CVS) aimed at excluding a chromosomal defect in the developing baby and/or a willingness to terminate the pregnancy should a serious birth defect be diagnosed.
Geoff Sher
702-533-2691
Dr Sher, what, in your view, is wrong with starting an antagonist on CD21 until CD2 and then starting stimulation (Gonal F) on CD3 and adding the antagonist back on CD7 and some luveris if LH levels are low later on, until trigger? Wouldn’t this achieve the same result as your agonist/antagonist conversion protocol?
N, because this would reduce your own production of FSH starting a few days prior to the start of your cycle and a rise in FSH is required to form responsive antral follicles. The start with an agonist before the cycle begins causes a rise in FSH to promote ripening of antral follicles which is needed for subsequent orderly antral follicle and follicle development.
Geoff Sher
Hi. Firstly thank you so much for taking the time to read this.
My husband and I are both healthy 34 year olds and started undergoing investigation 2 years ago after failing to conceive naturally. An in office hysteroscopy first raised concerns but they could not investigate fully. The following MRI report stated a small slightly arcuate uterus but did not diagnose a uterine malformation. I then had a hysterosalpingogram which showed filling of a small uterine cavity with dye spilling into the right fallopian tube but no filling on the left. A repeat hysteroscopy under general anaesthetic confirmed the diagnosis of a unicornuate uterus.
In our IVF workup we discovered my husband also has a low sperm count (unexplained) and the decision was made to proceed using ICSI. We had our first cycle in March with 11 mature eggs of which 6 were fertilised. During this cycle the thickest my lining ever got to was 5mm and all 6 embryos were frozen. We took a bit of a break over summer and have just had our first attempt at a FET cycle. I was down-regulated by injection on 6th of October and returned to clinic for a baseline scan on 26th October. Unsurprisingly my lining was nice and thin and we got started, given my previous lining problems it was explained we would jump straight to ‘doing everything possible’ to thicken this. For the last 2 weeks I have been taking 6mg of estradiol tablets (progynova) daily, 4 25mg sildenafil pessaries daily spread at regular intervals with a 30 minute minimum lie down afterwards and have been using 3 estraderm patches a week. I have also been using a suprecur nasal spray 4 x daily.
At yesterday’s clinic appointment the thickest measurement they could obtain for my lining was again 4.9/5mm. I have to continue with the medication until Monday as this is their protocol if not at the required 7mm at first scan but I am well aware (and the nurse agreed) that this cycle will be cancelled.
I feel that I am preparing myself for the end of our IVF journey, which while relatively short has taken quite an emotional and physical toll! The fact that with 2 different approaches my lining has ‘maxed out’ at the same measurement together with the knowledge of the underlying abnormality gives me little hope much else can be done. However I am aware I am very much drawing my own conclusions, as an NHS patient in a stretched service I expect it will be some time before I get an appointment to discuss the next step and I would be hugely grateful for any input you may have. In your experience is there likely to be much variation between lining thickness in repeat cycles where treatment has not been significantly altered? Is there anything else you would suggest that may aid lining growth? I understand no-one can quantify how much hope our case has but any guidance would be very much appreciated.
This is a significant problem. It is possible that after your 1st pregnancy you developed endometritis that damaged your ability to produce a good lining.
It was as far back as 1989, when I first published a study that examined the correlation between the thickness of a woman’s uterine lining (the endometrium), and the subsequent successful implantation of embryos in IVF patients. This study revealed that when the uterine lining measured <8mm in thickness by the day of the “hCG trigger” (in fresh IVF cycles), or at the time of initiating progesterone therapy (in embryo recipient cycles, e.g. frozen embryo transfers-FET, egg donation-IVF etc.) , pregnancy and birth rates were substantially improved. Currently, it is my opinion, that an ideal estrogen-promoted endometrial lining should ideally measure at least 9mm in thickness and that an endometrial lining measuring 8-9mm is “intermediate”. An estrogenic lining of <8mm is in most cases unlikely to yield a viable pregnancy.
A “poor” uterine lining is usually the result of the innermost layer of endometrium (the basal or germinal endometrium from which endometrium grows) ) not being able to respond to estrogen by propagating an outer, “functional” layer thick enough to support optimal embryo implantation and development of a healthy placenta (placentation). The “functional” layer ultimately comprises 2/3 of the full endometrial thickness and is the layer that sheds with menstruation in the event that no pregnancy occurs.
The main causes of a “poor” uterine lining are:
1.Damage to the basal endometrium as a result of:
a.Inflammation of the endometrium (endometritis) most commonly resulting from infected products left over following abortion, miscarriage or birth
b.Surgical trauma due to traumatic uterine scraping, (i.e. due to an over-aggressive D & C)
2.Insensitivity of the basal endometrium to estrogen due to:
a.Prolonged , over-use/misuse of clomiphene citrate
b.Prenatal exposure to diethylstilbestrol (DES). This is a drug that was given to pregnant women in the 1960’s to help prevent miscarriage
3.Over-exposure of the uterine lining to ovarian male hormones (mainly testosterone): Older women, women with diminished ovarian reserve (poor responders) and women with polycystic ovarian syndrome -PCOS tend to have raised LH biological activity.. This causes the connective tissue in the ovary (stroma/theca) to overproduce testosterone. The effect can be further exaggerated when certain methods for ovarian stimulation such as agonist (Lupron/Buserelin) “flare” protocols and high dosages of menotropins such as Menopur are used in such cases.
4.Reduced blood flow to the basal endometrium:
Examples include;
a.Multiple uterine fibroids - especially when these are present under the endometrium (submucosal)
b.Uterine adenomyosis (excessive, abnormal invasion of the uterine muscle by endometrial glands).
“The Viagra Connection”
Eighteen years ago years ago, after reporting on the benefit of vaginal Sildenafil (Viagra) for to women who had implantation dysfunction due to thin endometrial linings I was proud to announce the birth of the world’s first “Viagra baby.” Since the introduction of this form of treatment, thousands of women with thin uterine linings have been reported treated and many have gone on to have babies after repeated prior IVF failure.
For those of you who aren’t familiar with the use of Viagra in IVF, allow me to provide some context. It was in the 90’s that Sildenafil (brand named Viagra) started gaining popularity as a treatment for erectile dysfunction. The mechanism by which it acted was through increasing penile blood flow through increasing nitric oxide activity. This prompted me to investigate whether Viagra administered vaginally, might similarly improve uterine blood flow and in the process cause more estrogen to be delivered to the basal endometrium and thereby increase endometrial thickening. We found that when Viagra was administered vaginally it did just that! However oral administration was without any significant benefit in this regard. We enlisted the services of a compound pharmacy to produce vaginal Viagra suppositories. Initially, four (4) women with chronic histories of poor endometrial development and failure to conceive following several advanced fertility treatments were evaluated for a period of 4-6 weeks and then underwent IVF with concomitant Viagra therapy. Viagra suppositories were administered four times daily for 8-11 days and were discontinued 5-7 days prior to embryo transfer in all cases.
Our findings clearly demonstrated that vaginal Viagra produced a rapid and profound improvement in uterine blood flow and that was followed by enhanced endometrial development in all four cases. Three (3) of the four women subsequently conceived. I expanded the trial in 2002 and became the first to report on the administration of vaginal Viagra to 105 women with repeated IVF failure due to persistently thin endometrial linings. All of the women had experienced at least two (2) prior IVF failures attributed to intractably thin uterine linings. About 70% of these women responded to treatment with Viagra suppositories with a marked improvement in endometrial thickness. Forty five percent (45%) achieved live births following a single cycle of IVF treatment with Viagra The miscarriage rate was 9%. None of the women who had failed to show an improvement in endometrial thickness following Viagra treatment achieved viable pregnancies.
Following vaginal administration, Viagra is rapidly absorbed and quickly reaches the uterine blood system in high concentrations. Thereupon it dilutes out as it is absorbed into the systemic circulation. This probably explains why treatment is virtually devoid of systemic side effects
It is important to recognize that Viagra will NOT be effective in improving endometrial thickness in all cases. In fact, about 30%-40% of women treated fail to show any improvement. This is because in certain cases of thin uterine linings, the basal endometrium will have been permanently damaged and left unresponsive to estrogen. This happens in cases of severe endometrial damage due mainly to post-pregnancy endometritis (inflammation), chronic granulomatous inflammation due to uterine tuberculosis (hardly ever seen in the United States) and following extensive surgical injury to the basal endometrium (as sometimes occurs following over-zealous D&C’s).
Combining vaginal Viagra Therapy with oral Terbutaline;
In my practice I sometimes recommend combining Viagra administration with 5mg of oral terbutaline. The Viagra relaxes the muscle walls of uterine spiral arteries that feed the basal (germinal) layer of the endometrium while Terbutaline, relaxes the uterine muscle through which these spiral arteries pass. The combination of these two medications interacts synergistically to maximally enhance blood flow through the uterus, thereby improving estrogen delivery to the endometrial lining. The only drawback in using Terbutaline is that some women experience agitation, tremors and palpitations. In such cases the terbutaline should be discontinued. Terbutaline should also not be used women who have cardiac disease or in those who have an irregular heartbeat.
About 75% of women with thin uterine linings see a positive response to treatment within 2-3 days. The ones that do not respond well to this treatment are those who have severely damaged inner (basal/germinal) endometrial linings, such that no improvement in uterine blood flow can coax an improved response. Such cases are most commonly the result of prior pregnancy-related endometrial inflammation (endometritis) that sometimes occurs post abortally or following infected vaginal and/or cesarean delivery.
Viagra therapy has proven to be a god send to thousands of woman who because of a thin uterine lining would otherwise never have been able to successfully complete the journey “from infertility to family”.
To be effective, Viagra must be administered vaginally. It is NOT effective when taken orally. We prescribe 20mg vaginal suppositories to be inserted four times per day. Treatment is commenced soon after menstruation ceases and is continued until the day of the “hCG trigger.” While ideally the treatment should be sustained throughout the first half of the cycle, most women will respond within 48-72 hours. For this reason, Viagra can be used to “rescue” a poor lining after the cycle has already started, provided that there is enough time remaining prior to ovulation, egg retrieval or progesterone administration.
Good luck!
Geoff Sher