Hello! Are you available for a remote consultation in the next couple weeks? Would love to speak at your earliest availability.
Thank you!
– Geoffrey Sher, MD
Fill in the following information and we’ll get back to you.
Name: Jiji Wang
Hello! Are you available for a remote consultation in the next couple weeks? Would love to speak at your earliest availability.
Thank you!
For more than 50 years, scientists have been working to perfect the art of freezing and storing a woman’s eggs, also known as “egg banking”. Although there have been challenges, the progress has been both amazing and is promising.
Since the birth of the first “frozen egg baby” in the mid-1980s, we’ve celebrated than 6,000 -7000 births worldwide from thawed eggs. However, this is a relatively a small number when compared to the 5-6 million IVF babies and 1.5- to 2 million babies born from transferred frozen embryos during the same time.
Recently, there have been significant improvements in using frozen eggs to create embryos. Presently, success rates are comparable to that using frozen embryos especially when the latter have been screened for competency, using preimplantation genetic testing (PGT/ preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy ( PGT-A). Interestingly, currently, eggs are not screened using these techniques before they are frozen.
Let’s talk about who can benefit from this incredible advancement:
As technology continues to evolve, we are moving towards a future where egg freezing is both safe, reliable, and accessible to all. It allows individuals to make informed decisions about their future and family planning. However, a word of advice: Women should consider freezing their eggs at a younger age (below 35 years) when their eggs are at their healthiest. Older women, especially those over 39, should approach this with caution as the “competency” of their eggs declines with age.
Imagine having the chance to fulfill the dream of having a family through a wonderful solution called egg banking. This amazing process involves storing healthy eggs that are later used to help women struggling with infertility to have a baby through IVF and embryo transfer.
In the United States, around 20,000 IVF procedures using donated eggs happen each year, making up about 15% of all IVF cycles. People are seeking affordable options for IVF, with many traveling abroad \for lower-cost treatments.
In the United States, the cost of IVF using frozen donor eggs is high, prompting many to seek treatment in other countries ( “Medical tourism”). A significant part of this cost is associated with donor stipends and agency fees. This is why there’s a real need for a better way to access healthy donated eggs for IVF.
Conclusion:
The in vitro fertilization (IVF) market in the United States is rapidly growing and is approaching a value of $25 billion. The demand for egg banking, especially for Fertility Preservation (FP), is expected to be two to three times greater than conventional IVF. If even 10% of this potential FP market is tapped within the next five years, it could result in an annual industry worth over $3.5 billion. This shows the incredible potential of egg banking in making family dreams come true.
This amazing journey of advancements is paving the way for new hopes and dreams. It’s about giving people choices and the power to decide when and how to shape their families. Egg banking is not just about preserving eggs; it’s about preserving dreams and the possibility of a beautiful tomorrow.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Herewith are online links to 2 E-books recently co-authored with my partner at SFS-NY (Drew Tortoriello MD)……. for your reading pleasure:
If you are interested in having an online consultation with me, please contact my assistant, Patti Converse at 702-533-2691 or email her at concierge@sherivf.com\
Name: Neha Kumar
Recommendation regarding future IVF treatment- 41 y.o Female with DOR; multiple IVF cycles; embryos don’t make it to blastocyst (only had 2 blastocysts) so far.
I agree! This requires an online consultation;
I suggest you contact my assistant (Patti) and set this up with me. In the meanwhile, see below.
Embarking on the journey of IVF often raises questions about the likelihood of success and the quality of embryos. While it’s challenging to predict outcomes due to various factors, there’s hope and information to guide you.
Firstly, the key to fertilization potential lies in the chromosomal integrity of the egg. Women in their twenties or early thirties have a higher chance of having eggs with the required number of chromosomes for a healthy pregnancy. However, as age advances, this percentage decreases, emphasizing the importance of timely decisions.
Secondly, embryos that don’t develop into blastocysts are usually chromosomally abnormal and are not suitable for transfer, as they may lead to implantation issues or miscarriages. Not all blastocysts are guaranteed to be chromosomally normal, and this likelihood decreases with the age of the woman. Understanding this helps set realistic expectations.
While species and genetic factors play a role in egg quality, our choice of a controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocol also matters. Selecting the right COS protocol is crucial, especially for older women, those with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR), and those with polycystic ovarian syndrome. An individualized approach to optimize follicle growth and egg quality can significantly impact IVF outcomes.
In a natural ovulation cycle, hormonal changes are finely tuned to support healthy follicle development and egg maturation. When undergoing IVF, it’s essential to avoid disrupting this delicate balance. The Human Chorionic Gonadotropin (hCG) “trigger shot” should be carefully timed to enhance the chances of success.
In summary, understanding the influence of age, genetics, and COS protocols on egg quality is crucial for a successful IVF journey. The decision-making process becomes even more critical for older women or those facing specific fertility challenges. By embracing personalized approaches and staying informed, you can navigate the path of IVF with hope and optimism.
Understanding the impact of age and ovarian reserve on the success of in vitro fertilization (IVF) is crucial when it comes to reproductive health. This article aims to simplify and clarify these concepts, emphasizing their significance in the selection of ovarian stimulation protocols for IVF. By providing you with this information, we hope to shed light on the importance of considering these factors and making informed decisions regarding fertility treatments.
Why IVF should be regarded as treatment of choice for older women an those who have diminished ovarian reserve ( DOR):
Understanding the following factors will go a long way in helping you to make an informed decision and thereby improve the chances of a successful IVF outcome.
Preimplantation Genetic Screening/Testing(PGS/T): PGS/T is a valuable tool for identifying chromosomal abnormalities in eggs and embryos. By selecting the most competent (euploid) embryos, PGS/T significantly improves the success of IVF, especially in older women or those with DOR.
Understanding the impact of advancing age and declining ovarian reserve on IVF outcomes is essential when making decisions about fertility treatments. Age-related factors can affect egg quality and increase the likelihood of aneuploid embryos with resultant IVF failure. Diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) further complicates the process. By considering these factors, you can make informed choices and work closely with fertility specialists to optimize your chances of success. Remember, knowledge is power, and being aware of these aspects empowers you to take control of your reproductive journey.
“Staggered (ST) IVF refers to the process whereby embryos are intentionally frozen and cryobanked for elective transfer to the uterus in a subsequent cycle”.
Doctors often start with less invasive treatments for women over 40 who have patent fallopian tubes before considering IVF. They prescribe fertility drugs and may try artificial insemination. The reason is that IVF is more expensive, but it’s also more likely to lead to a successful live birth. When we think about the true cost of having a baby, IVF can actually be a more cost-effective choice.
IVF has proven to be far more successful than other treatments, regardless of a woman’s age or the cause of infertility. For example, for women under 35 with healthy tubes and a fertile partner, the chance of having a baby through IUI is less than 15% per attempt. But with IVF, the chances rise to about 40-45%. This difference becomes even more significant as a woman gets older. For women in their mid-40s, the chance of success with IUI drops to less than 3%, while IVF offers a 10-15% chance.
This doesn’t mean all women with healthy tubes and fertile partners should choose IVF over other options. However, for women in their 40s or those with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR), time is precious, and IVF may be the best choice. As a woman ages, the risk of miscarriage and having a chromosomally abnormal baby, increases. At age 30, the risk of miscarriage is about 15%, and the chance of having a baby with Down syndrome is less than 1 in 1000. But in the mid-40s, the risk of miscarriage exceeds 40%, and the chance of having a baby with Down syndrome becomes 1 in 60-80.
Staggered IVF and Preimplantation Genetic Sampling /Testing (PGS/PGT) with/without Embryo Banking offers real hope to older infertile women and those with DOR, as an alternative to IVF or egg donation. It involves multiple IVF procedures, biopsy of potentially viable embryos for PGS, cryobanking the embryos until several blastocysts have been collected, and then conducting genetic testing using Next Generation Gene Sequencing (NGS). Once the PGS/PGT results are known, the woman can return in a subsequent cycle for the transfer of up to two PGS/PGT-normal embryos to her uterus. Embryo banking with Staggered IVF and selective transfer of chromosomally healthy embryos greatly improves the success rate per embryo transferred, reaching as high as 50%. It also reduces the risk of miscarriage by 5-6 times and minimizes the chance of having a baby with chromosomal birth defects like Down syndrome.
As a woman ages, the competency of her eggs declines rapidly, resulting in diminished ovarian reserve. This reduces fertility, increases the risk of miscarriage, and raises the likelihood of chromosomal birth defects. IVF maximizes the number of available eggs and allows for genetic testing of resulting embryos, improving outcomes. Staggered IVF, Embryo Banking, and PGS/PGT are excellent tools that enhance pregnancy rates, reduce miscarriage risks, and minimize the chance of chromosomal birth defects. We strongly recommend this approach for women undergoing IVF in the following situations:
Embryo banking with staggered IVF and PGS/PGT represents a major breakthrough in the field of Assisted Reproduction ., one that offers hope primarily to older infertile women and those with diminished ovarian reserve. This method involves multiple IVF procedures, genetic testing of embryos, and cryobanking until several viable embryos are collected. By transferring only chromosomally healthy embryos, the success rate per embryo transferred can reach as high as 50%, significantly reducing the risk of miscarriage and chromosomal birth defects. For women facing the challenges of advancing age and diminished ovarian reserve, this advanced IVF technique provides an inspiring opportunity to improve pregnancy rates, minimize risks, and increase the chance of a healthy baby.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Herewith are online links to 2 E-books recently co-authored with my partner at SFS-NY (Drew Tortoriello MD)……. for your reading pleasure:
If you are interested in having an online consultation with me, please contact my assistant, Patti Converse at 702-533-2691 or email her at concierge@sherivf.com\
Name: Xuandao Nguyen Nguyen
Good morning Dr. Sher,
My name is Xuandao (“Dao”) Nguyen, I’m 42 yo and currently in round 4 of IVF at my local clinic here in Atlanta (ACRM). I want to give you a brief summary of my case and want to see if I could be a potential patient at your clinic. My IVF journey started in July 2023 at RBA (another clinic here), two rounds there and no PGA euploid embryo. (Worthy of note, before I began any retrieval rounds they found a large cyst (12x14cm) on my Right ovary so I ended up having to have an Oophorectomy of my Right ovary April of 2023.) I then moved on to ACRM, did two rounds with a changed in protocol and resulted in 5 euploid embryos. FET #1 in January 2024 resulted in MC at 8 weeks (tissue sample of fetus was normal). RE ran tests to see if I have any blood clotting factor, none found. FET #2 and #3 she incorporated prednisone, claritin, Pepcid acid, and Lovenox into my protocol which included Estrace 2mg TID and POI qAM; both times, no implantation (beta HCG was negative). They ran more test on me (hysteroscopy and Receptiva DX) and says I’m positive score for Endometriosis. So October and NOvember 2024, I went on 2 mos of Lupron Depot prior to transfer. We had FET #4 mid Dec. 2024, beta HCG picked up slow, very slow rise: 1st beta 54, 149, 450, 1621… I’m going in for a vaginal ultrasound today (week #7), but things aren’t looking promising. If needed, I’ll keep you posted. But Ultrasound at week 6 didn’t look great as we didn’t see a fetal pole.
I want to be proactive and reach out to you because I spoke with a friend locally (Susan Eihrich) that’s also a patient of yours and she says she’s working with you now. We have one more PGT euploid embryo left. Do you think there’s a good chance I need to seek you for some immunology evaluation? Any thoughts help! I really appreciate you taking the time to read my case. Have a wonderful day!
In my opinion, you have a likely implantation dysfunction . It could be anatomical or immunologic.
I suggest you contact my assistant, Patti at concierge@sherIVF.com to set up an online consultation with me.
Implantation dysfunction is often overlooked as a significant reason for IVF failure. This is especially true when IVF failure is unexplained, or when there are recurring pregnancy losses or underlying issues with the uterus, such as endo-uterine surface lesions, thin uterine lining (endometrium), or immunological factors.
IVF success rates have been improving in the past decade. Currently, in the United States, the average live birth rate per embryo transfer for women under 40 years old using their own eggs is about 2:5 per woman undergoing embryo transfer. However, there is a wide range of success rates among different IVF programs, varying from 20% to almost 50%. Based on these statistics, most women in the United States need to undergo two or more IVF-embryo transfer attempts to have a baby. Many IVF practitioners in the United States attribute the differences in success rates to variations in expertise among embryology laboratories, but this is not entirely accurate. Other factors, such as differences in patient selection, the failure to develop personalized protocols for ovarian stimulation, and the neglect of infectious, anatomical, and immunological factors that affect embryo implantation, are equally important.
Approximately 80% of IVF failures occur due to “embryo incompetency,” mainly caused by ( irregularities in chromosome number (aneuploidy), which is often related to the advancing age of the woman, diminished ovarian reserve ( DOR) but can also be influenced by the ovarian stimulation protocol chosen, and sperm dysfunction (male infertility). However, in around 20% of cases with dysfunction, failure is caused by problems with embryo implantation.
This section will focus on embryo implantation dysfunction and IVF failure which in the vast majority of cases is caused by:
When there are problems with the structure of the uterus, it can lead to difficulties in getting pregnant. While uterine fibroids usually don’t cause infertility, they can affect fertility when they distort the uterine cavity or protrude through the lining. Even small fibroids located just beneath the lining and protruding into the cavity can decrease the chances of the embryo attaching. Multiple fibroids within the uterine wall that encroach upon the cavity can disrupt blood flow, impair estrogen delivery, and prevent proper thickening of the lining. These issues can be identified through ultrasound during the menstrual cycle’s proliferative phase. Any lesion on the uterine surface, such as submucous fibroids, adhesions, endometrial polyps, or placental polyps, can interfere with implantation by causing a local inflammatory response similar to the effect of an intrauterine contraceptive device (IUD).
Clearly, even small uterine lesions can have a negative impact on implantation. Considering the high costs and emotional toll associated with in vitro fertilization (IVF) and related procedures, it is reasonable to perform diagnostic tests like hysterosalpingography (HSG), fluid ultrasound examination (hysterosonogram), or hysteroscopy before starting IVF. Uterine lesions that can affect implantation often require surgical intervention. In most cases, procedures like dilatation and curettage (D&C) or hysteroscopic resection are sufficient. Rarely a laparotomy may be needed. Such interventions often lead to an improvement in the response of the uterine lining.
Hysterosonogram( HSN/saline ultrasound) is a procedure where a sterile saline solution is injected into the uterus through the cervix using a catheter. Vaginal ultrasound is then used to examine the fluid-filled cavity for any irregularities that might indicate surface lesions like polyps, fibroid tumors, scarring, or a septum. When performed by an expert, HSN is highly effective in detecting even the smallest lesions and can supplant hysteroscopy in certain cases. HSN is less expensive, less invasive/traumatic, and equally effective as hysteroscopy. The only drawback is that if a lesion is found, hysteroscopy may still be needed for treatment.
Hysteroscopy is a diagnostic procedure performed in an office setting with minimal discomfort to the patient. It involves inserting a thin, lighted instrument called a hysteroscope through the vagina and cervix into the uterus to examine the uterine cavity. Normal saline is used to distend the uterus during the procedure. Like HSN, hysteroscopy allows for direct visualization of the inside of the uterus to identify defects that could interfere with implantation. We have observed that around one in eight IVF candidates have lesions that need attention before undergoing IVF to optimize the chances of success. I strongly recommend that all patients undergo therapeutic surgery, usually hysteroscopy, to correct any identified issues before proceeding with IVF. Depending on the severity and nature of the problem, hysteroscopy may require general anesthesia and should be performed in a surgical facility equipped for laparotomy if necessary.
As far back as In 1989, I and my team made an important discovery about using ultrasound to assess the thickness of the endometrium during the late proliferative phase of both “ natural” and hormone-stimulated cycles. The assessment helped predict the chances of conception. We found that an ideal thickness of over 9mm at the time of ovulation , egg retrieval or with the commencement of progesterone therapy in embryo recipient cycles ( e.g., IVF with egg donation, gestational, surrogacy and embryo adoption) was associated with optimal implantation rates, while an endometrial thickness of less than 8 mm was associated with failure to implant or early pregnancy loss in the vast majority of cases. An endometrium measuring <8mm was almost invariably associated with failure to implant or early pregnancy loss in the while an endometrium measuring 8 to 9 mm was regarded as being intermediate, and while pregnancies did occur in this range, the rates were only slightly lower than with an optimal lining of 9 mm
A “poor” uterine lining typically occurs when the innermost layer of the endometrium (basal or germinal endometrium) is unable to respond to estrogen by developing a thick enough outer “functional” layer to support successful embryo implantation and placental development. The “functional” layer, which accounts for two-thirds of the total endometrial thickness, is shed during menstruation if pregnancy does not occur.
The main causes of a poor uterine lining are:
In 1996 I introduced the Vaginal administration of Sildenafil (Viagra) to improve endometrial thickening. The selective administration of Sildenafil has shown great promise in improving uterine blood flow and increasing endometrial thickening in cases of thin endometrial linings. When administered vaginally, it is quickly absorbed and reaches high concentrations in the uterine blood system, diluting as it enters the systemic circulation. This method has been found to have minimal systemic side effects. However, it is important to note that Viagra may not be effective in all cases, as some cases of thin uterine linings may involve permanent damage to the basal endometrium, rendering it unresponsive to estrogen.
Severe endometrial damage leading to poor responsiveness to estrogen can occur in various situations. These include post-pregnancy endometritis (inflammation after childbirth), chronic granulomatous inflammation caused by uterine tuberculosis (rare in the United States), and significant surgical injury to the basal endometrium (which can happen after aggressive D&C procedures).
There is a growing recognition that problems with the immune function in the uterus can lead to embryo implantation dysfunction. The failure of proper immunologic interaction during implantation has been implicated as a cause of recurrent miscarriage, late pregnancy fetal loss, IVF failure, and infertility. Some immunologic factors that may contribute to these issues include antiphospholipid antibodies (APA), antithyroid antibodies (ATA) , and activated natural killer cells (NKa).
During ovulation and early pregnancy, the uterine lining is frequented by NK cells and T-cells, which together make up more than 80% of the immune cells in the uterine lining. These cells travel from the bone marrow to the endometrium where they proliferate under hormonal regulation. When exposed to progesterone, they produce TH-1 and TH-2 cytokines. TH-2 cytokines help the trophoblast (embryo’s “root system”) to penetrate the uterine lining, while TH-1 cytokines induce apoptosis (cell suicide), limiting placental development to the inner part of the uterus. The balance between TH1 and TH-2 cytokines is crucial for optimal placental development. NK cells and T-cells contribute to cytokine production. Excessive TH-1 cytokine production is harmful to the trophoblast and endometrial cells, leading to programmed cell death and ultimately to implantation failure. Functional NK cells reach their highest concentration in the endometrium around 6-7days after ovulation or exposure to progesterone, which coincides with the time of embryo implantation. It’s important to note that measuring the concentration of blood NK cells doesn’t reflect NK cell activation (NKa). The activation of NK cells is what matters. In certain conditions like endometriosis, the blood concentration of NK cells may be below normal, but NK cell activation is significantly increased.
There are several laboratory methods to assess NK cell activation (cytotoxicity), including immunohistochemical assessment of uterine NK cells and measuring TH-1 cytokines in the uterus or blood. However, the K-562 target cell blood test remains the gold standard. In this test, NK cells isolated from a woman’s blood are incubated with specific “target cells,” and the percentage of killed target cells is quantified. More than 12% killing indicates a level of NK cell activation that usually requires treatment. Currently, there are only a few Reproductive Immunology Reference Laboratories in the USA capable of reliably performing the K-562 target cell test.
There is a common misconception that adding IL (intralipid) or Intravenous gammaglobulin (IVIg) to NK cells can immediately downregulate NK cell activity. However, neither IL and IVIg cannot significantly suppress already activated NK cells. They are believed to work by regulating NK cell progenitors, which then produce downregulated NK cells. To assess the therapeutic effect, IL/IVIg infusion should be done about 14 days before embryos are transferred to the uterus to ensure a sufficient number of normal functional NK cells are present at the implantation site during embryo transfer. Failure to recognize this reality has led to the erroneous demand from IVF doctors for Reproductive Immunology Reference Laboratories to report on NK cell activity before and immediately after exposure to IVIg or IL at different concentrations. However, since already activated NK cells cannot be deactivated in the laboratory, assessing NKa suppression in this way has little clinical benefit. Even if blood is drawn 10-14 days after IL/IVIg treatment, it would take another 10-14 days to receive the results, which would be too late to be practically advantageous.
Many women who struggle with IVF failure or recurrent pregnancy loss, as well as those with a personal or family history of autoimmune diseases like lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, scleroderma, and dermatomyositis, often test positive for antiphospholipid antibodies (APAs). Over 30 years ago, I proposed a treatment for women with positive APA tests. This involved using a low dose of heparin to improve the success of IVF implantation and increase birth rates. Research indicated that heparin could prevent APAs from affecting the embryo’s “root system” ( the trophoblast), thus enhancing implantation. We later discovered that this therapy only benefits women whose APAs target specific phospholipids (phosphatidylethanolamine and phosphatidylserine). Nowadays, longer-acting low molecular weight heparinoids like Lovenox and Clexane have replaced heparin.
Between 2% and 5% of women of the childbearing age have reduced thyroid hormone activity (hypothyroidism). Women with hypothyroidism often manifest with reproductive failure i.e., infertility, unexplained (often repeated) IVF failure, or recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL). The condition is 5-10 times more common in women than in men. In most cases hypothyroidism is caused by damage to the thyroid gland resulting from thyroid autoimmunity (Hashimoto’s disease) caused by damage done to the thyroid gland by antithyroglobulin and antimicrosomal auto-antibodies. The increased prevalence of hypothyroidism and thyroid autoimmunity (TAI) in women is likely the result of a combination of genetic factors, estrogen-related effects, and chromosome X abnormalities. This having been said, there is significantly increased incidence of thyroid antibodies in non-pregnant women with a history of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss and thyroid antibodies can be present asymptomatically in women without them manifesting with overt clinical or endocrinologic evidence of thyroid disease. In addition, these antibodies may persist in women who have suffered from hyper- or hypothyroidism even after normalization of their thyroid function by appropriate pharmacological treatment. The manifestations of reproductive dysfunction thus seem to be linked more to the presence of thyroid autoimmunity (TAI) than to clinical existence of hypothyroidism and treatment of the latter does not routinely result in a subsequent improvement in reproductive performance. It follows that if antithyroid autoantibodies are associated with reproductive dysfunction they may serve as useful markers for predicting poor outcome in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technologies. Some years back, I reported on the fact that 47% of women who harbor thyroid autoantibodies, regardless of the absence or presence of clinical hypothyroidism, have activated uterine natural killer cells (NKa) cells and cytotoxic lymphocytes (CTL) and that such women often present with reproductive dysfunction. We demonstrated that appropriate immunotherapy with IVIG or intralipid (IL) and steroids subsequently often results in a significant improvement in reproductive performance in such cases.
Almost 50% of women with antithyroid antibodies do not have activated cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTL) or natural killer cells (NK cells). This suggests that the antibodies themselves may not be the direct cause of reproductive dysfunction. Instead, the activation of CTL and NK cells, which occurs in about half of the cases with thyroid autoimmunity (TAI), is likely an accompanying phenomenon that damages the early “root system” (trophoblast) of the embryo during implantation.
Treating women who have both antithyroid antibodies and activated NK cells/CTL with intralipid (IL) and steroids improves their chances of successful reproduction. However, women with antithyroid antibodies who do not have activated NK cells/CTL do not require this treatment.
Types of Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID) and NK Cell Activation:
Like the genes for eye color, DQ alpha/HLA gene combinations differ between people. Thus, the male (whose sperm created an embryo is likely to have different DQ alpha/HLA gene combinations than the potential mother . However, there are rare situations in which the male and the female partners have DQ-alpha/HLA gene combinations are the same.
The endometrial immune system is programmed to accept embryos with different DQ alpha/HLA gene combinations than its own. This is known as “alloimmune recognition.” So, if the man shares a similar DQ alpha/HLA gene combination with the woman, and his sperm creates an embryo that tries to implant , her endometrial immune system will see the embryo’s DQ alpha/HLA gene as “too similar” to its own and assume it is a foreign body.
Usually, this will lead to NK/T cell activation, the overproduction of TH-1 cytokines, and reproductive failure (i.e., infertility, and pregnancy loss). The severity with which this occurs is an important determinant of whether total implantation failure will occur or whether there would remain enough residual trophoblastic activity that would allow the pregnancy to limp along until the nutritional supply can no longer meet the demands of the pregnancy, at which point pregnancy loss occurs.
In cases of paternal-maternal DQ alpha/HLA matching, it will often take several pregnancies for NK cell activation to build to the point that women with alloimmune implantation dysfunction will present with clinical evidence of implantation dysfunction. Sometimes it starts off with one or two live births, whereupon NK/T cell activity starts to build, leading to one or more early miscarriages. Eventually the NK/T cell activation is so high that subsequent pregnancies can be lost before the woman is even aware that she was pregnant at all. At this point, she is often diagnosed with secondary, “unexplained” infertility and/or “unexplained” IVF failure.
Alloimmune Implantation Dysfunction is diagnosed by testing the blood of both the male and female partners for matching DQ alpha genes and NK/T cell activation.
There are two types of DQ alpha/HLA genetic matching:
It should be emphasized that poor embryo quality is not always the main cause of reproductive dysfunction and that the complex interaction between embryonic cells and the lining of the uterus plays a critical role in successful implantation. Women with personal or family histories of autoimmune disease or endometriosis and those with unexplained (often repeated) IVF failure or recurrent pregnancy loss, often have immunologic implantation dysfunction (IID as the underlying cause . For such women, it is important to understand how IID leads to reproductive failure and how selective treatment options such as intralipid (IL), corticosteroid and heparinoid therapy, can dramatically improve reproductive outcomes. Finally, there is real hope that proper identification and management of IID can significantly improve the chance of successful reproduction and ultimately contribute to better quality of life after birth.
Geoff Sher
____________________________________________________________________________________
Herewith are online links to 2 E-books recently co-authored with my partner at SFS-NY (Drew Tortoriello MD)……. for your reading pleasure:
If you are interested in having an online consultation with me, please contact my assistant, Patti Converse at 702-533-2691 or email her at concierge@sherivf.com\
Name: Daysi Mercedes Magarin Bautista
No hablo inglés sólo español
Please re-post in English!
Geoff Sher
Name: Vikki Carpenter
Hello, my name is Vikki Carpenter. I am 40 years old and started IVF last year. I have one IVF failure (chemical), and 7 other chemical pregnancies before IVF. The pattern is virtually the same: I get pregnant and within a week something goes wrong and it turns into a chemical pregnancy. We transferred on a 6.7 lining, which I understand was thin so that could be a factor, but I am also wondering about how my 7 other chemical pregnancies play a role. I have asked my doctor about immune issues, and she has dismissed it because of my thin lining. Although I recognize the thin lining plays a role, but I am not convinced that is the only thing going on as I have an undiagnosed pain management issue. I have been tested for numerous immune issues, but nothing has come back conclusive. I am heading into a ReceptivaDX test to test for silent endo. If this comes back positive, I am wondering what further tests immunology wise I should be considering. We are paying out of pocket for everything, so I am really trying to rule out everything possible.
I will say that we are working with tested and untested embryos.
From my first ER we have:
5AB female (complex segmental low level mosaic)
5BB male (low level mosaic )
5 AB male (aneuploid)
Untested second ER:
2 3AA’s and a 4BB
Thank you for your time.
Best,
Vikki
When it comes to reproduction, humans face challenges compared to other mammals. A significant number of fertilized eggs in humans do not result in live births, with up to 75% failing to develop, and around 30% of pregnancies ending within the first 10 weeks (first trimester). Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) refers to two or more consecutive failed pregnancies, which is relatively rare, affecting less than 5% of women for two losses and only 1% for three or more losses. Understanding the causes of pregnancy loss and finding solutions is crucial for those affected. This article aims to explain the different types of pregnancy loss and shed light on potential causes.
Types of Pregnancy Loss: Pregnancy loss can occur at various stages, leading to different classifications:
Causes of Recurrent Pregnancy Loss (RPL): Recurrent pregnancy loss refers to multiple consecutive miscarriages. While chromosomal abnormalities are a leading cause of sporadic early pregnancy losses, RPL cases are mostly attributed to non-chromosomal factors. Some possible causes include:
IMMUNOLOGIC IMPLANTATION DYSFUNCTION AND RPL:
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 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 natural killer cells (NKa) and cytotoxic lymphocytes (CTL B) 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 Antiphospholipid antibody (APA) panel Antinuclear antibody (ANA) panel Antithyroid antibody panel (i.e., antithyroglobulin and antimicrosomal antibodies) Reproductive immunophenotype Natural killer cell activity (NKa) assay (i.e., K562 target cell test) Alloimmune testing of both the male and female partners
TREATMENT OF RPL
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 intralipid (IL), intravenous immunoglobulin-G (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: When in addition to a history of RPL, another standard indication for IVF (e.g., tubal factor, endometriosis, and male factor infertility) is superimposed and in cases where selective immunotherapy is needed to treat an immunologic implantation dysfunction. The reason for IVF being a preferred approach when immunotherapy is indicated is that in order to be effective, 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 screening/ testing (PGS/T), with tests such as next generation gene sequencing (NGS), can provide a valuable diagnostic and therapeutic advantage in cases of RPL. PGS/T requires IVF to provide access to embryos for testing. There are a few cases of intractable alloimmune dysfunction due to absolute DQ alpha gene matching ( where there is a complete genotyping match between the male and female partners) 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. Conclusion:
Understanding the causes of pregnancy loss is crucial for individuals experiencing recurrent miscarriages. While chromosomal abnormalities are a common cause of sporadic early pregnancy losses, other factors such as uterine environment problems, immunologic implantation dysfunction, blood clotting disorders, and genetic or structural abnormalities can contribute to recurrent losses. By identifying the underlying cause, healthcare professionals can provide appropriate interventions and support to improve the chances of a successful pregnancy. 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.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Herewith are online links to 2 E-books recently co-authored with my partner at SFS-NY (Drew Tortoriello MD)……. for your reading pleasure:
If you are interested in having an online consultation with me, please contact my assistant, Patti Converse at 702-533-2691 or email her at concierge@sherivf.com\
Name: Leydi Morales
Quisiera saber si soy apta para la donación de óvulos
Please post in English!
Geoff Sher
_________________________________________________________________
Herewith are online links to 2 E-books recently co-authored with my partner at SFS-NY (Drew Tortoriello MD)……. for your reading pleasure:
If you are interested in having an online consultation with me, please contact my assistant, Patti Converse at 702-533-2691 or email her at concierge@sherivf.com\