Your Journey.
Your Family.

At Sher Fertility Solutions, we understand that each patient is unique. Everything we do is customized to you and your specific needs.

Your Trusted Fertility Clinic in New York, NY

Latest videos

Sher Fertility Solutions IG Live – Staying sane during IVF – 3 expert tips

Medical Director, Dr. Drew Tortoriello, shares his top tips to help you on your IVF journey.

Whether this is your 1st round, or you’ve been here before, Dr. Tortoriello shares advice from holistic wellbeing and mindset to injection tips.

Dr. Geoffrey Sher on Endometriosis on The Egg Whisperer Show

Providing the Highest Quality of Care

SFS consistently provides the utmost personal, compassionate and state-of-the-art care.

Our physicians consult one-on-one with each family and take pride in the relationships built with our patients, we put you first.


Our clinical care team of fertility specialists will be available to you all day, every day.


No matter how difficult a case, we are driven to help you succeed in your fertility goals.


We make it easy for you to afford our IVF and fertility treatment services.

Ask Our Doctors

Dear Patients,
I created this forum to welcome any questions you have on the topic of infertility, IVF, conception, testing, evaluation, or any related topics. I do my best to answer all questions in less than 24 hours. I know your question is important and, in many cases, I will answer within just a few hours. Thank you for taking the time to trust me with your concern.

– Geoffrey Sher, MD


Name: Jan R

August 25, 2022
Hi at what age can a daughter donate eggs to mothers based on your website I see you did this once thanks


I have done this > once. The daughter needs to be >18y and preferably over 21y.


Geoff Sher

Name: Azhar K

August 23, 2022
I have done my blood test i want to ask from u that can u plz confirm my hcg level 113 477,0 please tell me i am waiting for my test positive


This is strongly positive!


Geoff Sher

Name: Helen D

August 22, 2022
Is an ERA necessary for a natural FET cycle?


The blastocyst and the endometrium are in a constant state of cross-talk. In order for successful implantation to take place, the blastocyst must be at the appropriate stage of development, and needs to signal a well synchronized endometrium to ‘accept it”. This dialogue between embryo and endometrium involves growth factors, cytokines, immunologic accommodations, cell adhesion molecules, and transcription factors. These are all mostly genetically driven but are also heavily influenced by numerous physiologic, pathophysiologic, hormonal and molecular mechanisms capable of profoundly affecting the receptivity of the secretory endometrium to the overtures made by the embryo, to implant.

Embryo implantation takes place 6-9 days after ovulation. This period is commonly referred to as the “window of implantation (WOI)”. In the past it was believed that as long as the embryo reached the uterus in this 4 day time frame, its chance of implanting would not be affected.

In 2013, after evaluating 238 genes in the secretory endometrium and applying bioformatics, Ruiz-Alonzo, et all introduced the Endometrial Receptivity Array (ERA) . Using this test, they categorized mid-secretory endometria into 4 categories: “a) proliferative, b) pre-receptive, c) receptive or d) post-receptive”. They claimed that women with pre-receptive or post-receptive endometria were more likely to experience failed implantation post-embryo transfer (ET).

It was in large part this research which suggested that the concept of a relatively “wide” (4day) WOI, was flawed, that an optimal WOI is likely much narrower and could be a critical factor in determining the success or failure of implantation post-ET. Ruiz-Alonzo also  reported that about 25% of women with recurrent IVF failure (RIF), have pre, or post-receptive endometria. They presented data suggesting that  viable IVF pregnancy rates could be enhanced,

by deferring FET by about 24 hours in women who had pre-receptive endometria and bringing ET forward by the same amount of time, in women with post-receptive endometria,


There is no doubt that ERA testing has opened the door to an intriguing arena for research. Presently however, available data is inconclusive. Here, following  recent studies are 2 dissenting opinions regarding  the value for ERA:

  • Basil and Casper (2018) state: “Performing the ERA test in a mock cycle prior to a FET does not seem to improve the ongoing pregnancy rate in good prognosis patients. Further large prospective studies are needed to elucidate the role of ERA testing in both good prognosis patients and in patients with recurrent implantation failure”
  • Churchill and Comstock (2017)  conclude:” In our preliminary observations, the non-receptive ERA group had similar live birth rates compared to the receptive ERA group. It appears the majority of the pregnancies conceived in the non-receptive group occurred during ovulatory cycles and thus a non-receptive ERA in a medicated cycle likely does not have prognostic value for ovulatory cycles. Larger studies are needed to assess the prognostic value of ERA testing in the gen-eral infertility population.”

There are additional negatives that relate to the considerable emotional and financial cost of doing ERA testing:

  1. First, the process costs $600-$1000 to undertake
  2. , Second, it requires that the patient undergo egg retrieval, vitrify (cryobank) all blastocysts, res for 1 or more cycles to allow their hormonal equilibrium to restore, do an ERA biopsy to determine the synchronicity of the endometrium, wait a few weeks for the results of the test and thereupon engage in undertaking an additional natural or hormonal preparation cycle for timed FET. This represents a significant time lapse, emotional cost and additional expense.

Presently, ERA testing is only advocated for women who have experienced several IVF failures. However, some authorities are beginning to advocate that it become routine for women undergoing all IVF.

The  additional financial cost inherent in the performance of the ERA test ($600-$1000), the considerable time delay in getting results, the fact that awaiting results of testing and preparing the patient for FET, of necessity extends the completion of the IVF/ET process by at least a few months, all serve to increase the emotional and financial hardship confronting patients undergoing ERA. Such considerations, coupled with the current absence of conclusive data that confirm efficacy, are arguments against the widespread use of ERA . In my opinion, ERA testing should presently be considered as being  one additional diagnostic and be confined to women with “unexplained” RIF.

Gold standard statistical analyses require that all confounding variables be controlled while examining the effect of altering the one under assessment. There is an obvious interplay of numerous, ever changing variables involved in outcome following ET,  e.g. embryo competency, anatomical configuration of the uterus and the contour of the endometrial cavity, endometrial thickness, immunologic and molecular factors as well as the very important  effect of technical skill/expertise in performing the  ET procedure …(to mention but a few). It follows that it is virtually impossible to draw reliable conclusions from IVF-related randomized controlled studies that use outcome as the end-point. This applies equally to results reported following “ gold standard”  testing on the efficacy of ERA and, is one of the main reasons why I question the reliability of reported data (positive or negative).

The fact is that IVF (and related technologies) constitute neither a “pure science” nor a “pure art”. Rather they represent an “art-science blend”, where scientific principles applied to longitudinal experience and technical expertise coalesce to produce a biomedical product that will invariably differ (to a greater or lesser degree) from one set of clinical circumstances to another.

Since, the ultimate goal of applied Assisted Reproductive Medicine is to safely achieve the birth of a viable and healthy baby, the tools we apply, that are aimed at achieving this end-point, are honed through the adaptation of scientific principles and concepts, experience and expertise, examined and tested longitudinally over time. Needless to say, the entire IVF/ET process is of necessity subject to change and adaptation as new scientific and technical developments emerge.

This absolutely applies to the ERA as well!



From Our Patients

Hi- I happily recommend Dr. Sher and his team. He came recommended to me by my sister after I had a negative experience with another clinic close by me. I didn’t think I wanted to travel to attempt to freeze embryos/eggs but it ended up being a better choice to go with a better Dr and team.

Michelle L

Sacramento, CA

Just couldn’t let a day go by without expressing my gratitude and sincere thanks to the amazing Dr. Drew and his team for their dedication to my personal care 5 years ago as a 45 year old Mom-to-be! Our Daughter is our world and we’re so blessed that Dr. Drew and his team cared for us on our journey. We highly recommend Dr. Drew and his team!

Suzanne D

New York

I cannot recommend Dr. Tortoriello and his team at Sher more highly. Dr. T is an excellent doctor, very kind, compassionate, patient, always listens to what you have to say including answering many questions during each visit, is very responsive to e-mails, and did not let us give up hope after being unable to conceive after about 5 years and a few IVF attempts.