The psychological impact of mild ovarian stimulation combined with single embryo transfer compared with conventional IVF

The need for longitudinal data on the value of fertility treatment for infertile patients' quality of life: A review and pilot study

Infertility threatens the life goal of parenthood and, hence, quality of life (QoL) of (wo)men, but the fertility clinic trajectory might be burdensome. This review of longitudinal studies and pilot longitudinal study examines the impact of the pre-in vitro fertilization (IVF) fertility clinic trajectory on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for emotional well-being, including QoL. A publication found that the diagnostic workup decreases men's infertility-specific distress while publications disagree whether it decreases (wo)men's anxious and depressive reactions. Intrauterine insemination (IUI) was found to increase (wo)men's depressive reactions. Publications on infertility-specific, health-related, and overall QoL were missing. The pilot indicated that (wo)men's overall QoL is not affected by the diagnostic workup but is decreased by the time of the third IUI. Longitudinal studies on the impact of starting the fertility clinic trajectory on PROMs are needed as they are essential for patient-centered clinical decision-making and patient-centered policy-level decision-making.

The impact of sleep on in vitro fertilization embryo transfer outcomes: a prospective study

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively examine the association between sleep quality before embryo transfer with pregnancy outcomes in a population with infertility.

DESIGN

Prospective observational cohort study.

SETTING

Center for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong University.

PATIENT(S)

From 7,847 women who enrolled from July 2019 to July 2020, 3,183 were eligible.

INTERVENTION(S)

Information about sleep, including sleep quality, sleep duration, and sleep chronology, were collected before embryo transfer using an integrated questionnaire. Sleep quality is quantified by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) with a cut-point of 5 (PSQI >5 identifying poor sleep vs. PSQI ≤5 identifying good sleep). Average weekly sleep duration was calculated and divided into 5 groups (≤7, 7-8, 8-9, 9-10, and >10 h/d). In defining sleep chronotype, women with a sleep midpoint earlier than 2:30 AM were defined as morningness type, whereas those with a sleep midpoint later than 3:30 AM were defined as eveningness type, and the remainder were defined as an intermediate type.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Rate of clinical pregnancy and live birth.

RESULT(S)

Compared with those reporting poor sleep quality, those reporting good sleep quality showed higher clinical pregnancy (69.3% vs. 65.1%) and live birth rates (50.5% vs. 45.7%). After adjusting for confounding factors, women who self-reported good sleep had a higher probability of acquiring clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.13) and of live birth (RR, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.23). Women with the morningness chronotype had the lowest rates of clinical pregnancy and live birth and had the highest rate of miscarriage. Sleep duration was found to have no significant association with any outcomes. In the stratified analyses, the positive associations of good sleep quality with clinical pregnancy and live birth existed only among women younger than 35 years old or who had undergone fresh embryo transfer.

CONCLUSION(S)

Good sleep quality was positively associated with outcomes in in vitro fertilization embryo transfer (IVF-ET), particularly with clinical pregnancy and live birth. Poor sleep quality may be a risk factor for adverse IVF-ET outcomes for women <35 years old. Treating sleep disorders and providing sleep behavior guidance to patients receiving IVF-ET may improve pregnancy outcomes.

Female subfertility

Subfertility is common and affects one in six couples, half of whom lack an explanation for their delay in conceiving. Developments in the diagnosis and treatment of subfertility over the past 50 years have been truly remarkable. Indeed, current generations of couples with subfertility are more fortunate than previous generations, as they have many more opportunities to become parents. The timely access to effective treatment for subfertility is important as many couples have a narrow window of opportunity before the age-related effects of subfertility limit the likelihood of success. Assisted reproduction can overcome the barriers to fertility caused by tubal disease and low sperm count, but little progress has been made in reducing the effect of increasing age on ovarian function. The next 5-10 years will likely see further increases in birth rates in women with subfertility, a greater awareness of lifestyle factors and a possible refinement of current assisted reproduction techniques and the development of new ones. Such progress will bring challenging questions regarding the potential benefits and harms of treatments involving germ cell manipulation, artificial gametes, genetic screening of embryos and gene editing of embryos. We hope to see a major increase in fertility awareness, access to safe and cost-effective fertility care in low-income countries and a reduction in the current disparity of access to fertility care.

Women With Mental Illness Seeking Assisted Reproduction Considerations in Ethical Candidate Selection

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to provide guidance to clinicians facing requests for assisted reproduction from women with mental illness.

RECENT FINDINGS

The paper explores the clinical and safety aspects of initiating fertility treatment in this context, including the use of psychotropic medication and the risk of untreated psychiatric mood or psychotic disorders. It also presents the ethical considerations involved in candidate selection, including treating similar cases equitably to avoid biased decisions based solely on "gut-feelings," respect for women's reproductive autonomy, and an effort to protect patients and prospective fetuses/children from harm by employing optimal strategies regarding medication and psychosocial support. Clinicians ought to be informed regarding recent evidence related to the safety and efficacy of psychopharmacologic treatment of women during pregnancy and the post-partum. They should also carry out a thoughtful ethical analysis to ensure minimal violation of women's reproductive autonomy.

Low dosing of gonadotropins in in vitro fertilization cycles for women with poor ovarian reserve: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of low doses of gonadotropins and gonadotropins combined with oral compounds compared with high doses of gonadotropins in ovarian stimulation regimens in terms of ongoing pregnancy per fresh IVF attempt in women with poor ovarian reserve undergoing IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies that evaluate the effectiveness of low dosing of gonadotropins alone or combined with oral compounds compared with high doses of gonadotropins in women with poor ovarian reserve undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

Subfertile women with poor ovarian reserve undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment.

INTERVENTION(S)

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and the Clinical Trials Registry using medical subject headings and free text terms up to June 2016, without language or year restrictions. We included randomized controlled studies (RCTs) enrolling subfertile women with poor ovarian reserve undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment and comparing low doses of gonadotropins and gonadotropins combined with oral compounds versus high doses of gonadotropins. We assessed the risk of bias using the criteria recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. We pooled the results by meta-analysis using the fixed and random effects model.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURE(S)

The primary outcome was ongoing pregnancy rate (PR) per woman randomized.

RESULT(S)

We retrieved 787 records. Fourteen RCTs (N = 2,104 women) were included in the analysis. Five studies (N = 717 women) compared low doses of gonadotropins versus high doses of gonadotropins. There was no evidence of a difference in ongoing PR (2 RCTs: risk rate 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.62-1.57, I² = 0). Nine studies (N = 1,387 women) compared ovarian stimulation using gonadotropins combined with the oral compounds letrozole (n = 6) or clomiphene citrate (CC) (n = 3) versus high doses of gonadotropins. There was no evidence of a difference in ongoing PR (3 RCTs: risk rate 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.63-1.27, I² = 0).

CONCLUSION(S)

We found no evidence of a difference in pregnancy outcomes between low doses of gonadotropins and gonadotropins combined with oral compounds compared with high doses of gonadotropins in ovarian stimulation regimens. Whether low doses of gonadotropins or gonadotropins combined with oral compounds is to be preferred is unknown, as they have never been compared head to head. A health economic analysis to test the hypothesis that an ovarian stimulation with low dosing is more cost-effective than high doses of gonadotropins is needed.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016041301.

Quality of life and psychosocial and physical well-being among 1,023 women during their first assisted reproductive technology treatment: secondary outcome to a randomized controlled trial comparing gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist and GnRH agonist protocols

OBJECTIVE

To compare self-reported quality of life, psychosocial well-being, and physical well-being during assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment in 1,023 women allocated to either a short GnRH antagonist or long GnRH agonist protocol.

DESIGN

Secondary outcome of a prospective phase 4, open-label, randomized controlled trial. Four times during treatment a questionnaire on self-reported physical well-being was completed. Further, a questionnaire on self-reported quality of life and psychosocial well-being was completed at the day of hCG testing.

SETTING

Fertility clinics at university hospitals.

PATIENT(S)

Women referred for their first ART treatment were randomized in a 1:1 ratio and started standardized ART protocols.

INTERVENTION(S)

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue; 528 women allocated to a short GnRH antagonist protocol and 495 women allocated to a long GnRH agonist protocol.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Self-reported quality of life, psychosocial well-being, and physical well-being based on questionnaires developed for women receiving ART treatment.

RESULT(S)

Baseline characteristics were similar, and response rates were 79.4% and 74.3% in the GnRH antagonist and GnRH agonist groups, respectively. Self-reported quality of life during ART treatment was rated similar and slightly below normal in both groups. However, women in the GnRH antagonist group felt less emotional (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.69), less limited in their everyday life (AOR 0.74), experienced less unexpected crying (AOR 0.71), and rated quality of sleep better (AOR 1.55). Further, women receiving GnRH agonist treatment felt worse physically.

CONCLUSION(S)

Women in a short GnRH antagonist protocol rated psychosocial and physical well-being during first ART treatment better than did women in a long GnRH agonist protocol. However, the one item on self-reported general quality of life was rated similarly.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00756028.

Effectiveness of mild ovarian stimulation versus GnRH agonist protocol in women undergoing assisted reproductive technology: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

our meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the mild ovulation induction protocol using CC/gonadotropin/GnRH antagonist compared to the conventional GnRH agonist protocol in women undergoing ART.

METHOD

Six electronic databases were searched from their date of establishment until August 2016. Outcomes in our analysis were calculated in terms of relative risk (RR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) and standard mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random effect models or fixed effect models.

RESULTS

Six prospective controlled clinical trials with 1543 women comparing the clinical impacts of the two protocols were included. The synthesized results suggested a significant reduction in the quantity of gonadotropins (SMD: -1.96, 95% CI: -2.28 to 1.64, I² = 78.5%), the incidence of OHSS (RR: 0.16, 95% CI 0.03-0.86, I² = 0%) and an increase in the cycle cancelation rate (RR: 1.46, 95% CI 1.05-2.03, I² = 89.4%). While no evidence of statistically significant differences between the groups existed in the other clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This study suggested that the probable benefits of the mild protocol, including its less costs and safer process without reducing the overall IVF treatment success rates, seemed to make it a better treatment option. Larger sample prospective trials evaluating live birth, clinical pregnancy, OHSS, multiple pregnancy incidence and so on were desired to establish.

The effect of expressive writing intervention for infertile couples: a randomized controlled trial

STUDY QUESTION

Is expressive writing intervention (EWI) efficacious in reducing distress and improving pregnancy rates for couples going through ART treatment?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Compared to controls, EWI statistically significantly reduced depressive symptoms but not anxiety and infertility-related distress.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

ART treatment is considered stressful. So far, various psychological interventions have been tested for their potential in reducing infertility-related distress and the results are generally positive. It remains unclear whether EWI, a brief and potentially cost-effective intervention, could be advantageous.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE, DURATION

Between November 2010 and July 2012, a total of 295 participants (163 women, 132 men) were randomly allocated to EWI or a neutral writing control group.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Participants were couples undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment. Single women and couples with Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis or acute change of procedure from insemination to IVF, were excluded. EWI participants participated in three 20-min home-based writing exercises focusing on emotional disclosure in relation to infertility/fertility treatment (two sessions) and benefit finding (one session). Controls wrote non-emotionally in three 20-min sessions about their daily activities. The participants completed questionnaires at the beginning of treatment (t1), prior to the pregnancy test (t2), and 3 months later (t3). In total, 26.8% (79/295) were lost to follow-up. Mixed linear models were chosen to compare the two groups over time for psychological outcomes (depression, anxiety and infertility-related distress), and a Chi² test was employed in order to examine group differences in pregnancy rates MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: One hundred and fifty-three participants received EWI (women = 83; men = 70) and 142 participants were allocated to the neutral writing control group (women = 83; men = 62). Both women and partners in the EWI group exhibited greater reductions in depressive symptoms compared with controls (P = 0.049; [CI 95%: -0.04; -0.01] Cohen's d = 0.27). The effect of EWI on anxiety did not reach statistical significance. Overall infertility-related distress increased marginally for the partners in the EWI group compared to the partners in the control group (P = 0.06; Cohen's d = 0.17). However, in relation to the personal subdomain, the increase was statistically significant (P = 0.01; Cohen's d = 0.24). EWI had no statistically significant effect on pregnancy rates with 42/83 (50.6%) achieving pregnancy in the EWI group compared with 40/80 (49.4%) in the control group (RR = 0.99 [CI 95% = 0.725, 1.341]; P = 0.94).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The results for depressive symptoms corresponded to a small effect size and the remaining results failed to reach statistical significance. This could be due to sample characteristics leading to a possible floor-effect, as we did not exclude participants with low levels of emotional distress at baseline. Furthermore, men showed increased infertility-related distress over time.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

EWI is a potentially cost-effective and easy to implement home-based intervention, and even small effects may be relevant. When faced with infertility, EWI could thus be a relevant tool for alleviating depressive symptoms by allowing the expression of feelings about infertility that may be perceived as socially unacceptable. However, the implications do not seem to be applicable for men, who presented with increased infertility-related distress over time.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The present study was supported by research grants from Merck Sharpe and Dohme and The Danish Agency for Science Technology and Innovation as part of a publicly funded PhD. The funding bodies had no influence on the data collection, analysis or conclusions of the study. None of the authors have any conflicts of interest to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinicaltrials.gov, trial no. NCT01187095.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

7th September 2010 DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 23rd November 2010.

ESHRE guideline: routine psychosocial care in infertility and medically assisted reproduction-a guide for fertility staff

STUDY QUESTION

Based on the best available evidence in the literature, what is the optimal management of routine psychosocial care at infertility and medically assisted reproduction (MAR) clinics?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Using the structured methodology of the Manual for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) Guideline Development, 120 recommendations were formulated that answered the 12 key questions on optimal management of routine psychosocial care by all fertility staff.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN

The 2002 ESHRE Guidelines for counselling in infertility has been a reference point for best psychosocial care in infertility for years, but this guideline needed updating and did not focus on routine psychosocial care that can be delivered by all fertility staff.

STUDY, DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This guideline was produced by a group of experts in the field according to the 12-step process described in the ESHRE Manual for Guideline Development. After scoping the guideline and listing a set of 12 key questions in PICO (Patient, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome) format, thorough systematic searches of the literature were conducted; evidence from papers published until April 2014 was collected, evaluated for quality and analysed. A summary of evidence was written in a reply to each of the key questions and used as the basis for recommendations, which were defined by consensus within the guideline development group (GDG). Patient and additional clinical input was collected during the scoping and the review phase of the guideline development.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

The guideline group, comprising psychologists, two medical doctors, a midwife, a patient representative and a methodological expert, met three times to discuss evidence and reach consensus on the recommendations.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE THE GUIDELINE PROVIDES

120 recommendations that aim at guiding fertility clinic staff in providing optimal evidence-based routine psychosocial care to patients dealing with infertility and MAR. The guideline is written in two sections. The first section describes patients' preferences regarding the psychosocial care they would like to receive at clinics and how this care is associated with their well-being. The second section of the guideline provides information about the psychosocial needs patients experience across their treatment pathway (before, during and after treatment) and how fertility clinic staff can detect and address these. Needs refer to conditions assumed necessary for patients to have a healthy experience of the fertility treatment. Needs can be behavioural (lifestyle, exercise, nutrition and compliance), relational (relationship with partner if there is one, family friends and larger network, and work), emotional (well-being, e.g. anxiety, depression and quality of life) and cognitive (treatment concerns and knowledge).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

We identified many areas in care for which robust evidence was lacking. Gaps in evidence were addressed by formulating good practice points, based on the expert opinion of the GDG, but it is critical for such recommendations to be empirically validated.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The evidence presented in this guideline shows that providing routine psychosocial care is associated with or has potential to reduce stress and concerns about medical procedures and improve lifestyle outcomes, fertility-related knowledge, patient well-being and compliance with treatment. As only 45 (36.0%) of the 125 recommendations were based on high-quality evidence, the guideline group formulated recommendations to guide future research with the aim of increasing the body of evidence.

Impact of different controlled ovarian stimulation protocols on the physical and psychological burdens in women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intra cytoplasmic sperm injection

CONTEXT:

Infertility treatment involves a considerable amount of physical and psychological burden which may impact the outcome.

AIM:

The objective was to understand the amount of physical and psychological burden in women undergoing their first in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intra cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles.

SETTING AND DESIGN:

Multi-center, prospective, parallel, observational study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

The study was conducted across 12 IVF centers in India. A total of 692 women undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation as a part of the first cycle IVF/ICSI completed the trial. Women were recruited in 2 groups based on type of treatment (Group A - gonadotropin-releasing hormone [GnRH] antagonist; Group B - GnRH agonist) and were asked to fill questionnaires during the 2 treatment visits.

RESULTS:

The mean changes between Visit 1 (baseline) and Visit 2 in anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) scores in Group A for anxiety and depression were −0.5 (3.67), −0.1 (3.57) respectively and for Group B were −0.4 (3.68), 0.1 (3.67) respectively, which was not statistically significant. In Group A, the mean (±standard deviation [SD]) Hopkins Symptom Check List (HSCL) score was 17.9 (±5.17) in visit 1 and 19.1 (±5.45) Visit 2. The change between visits was 1.1 (P < 0.0001) with higher score reflecting higher somatic distress symptoms. In Group B, the mean (±SD) HSCL score was 18.2 (±5.19) in Visit 1 and 18.8 (±5.23) in visit 2. The change between visits was 0.6 (P < 0.0014). The difference of the mean change in physical burden between Group A and Group B was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION:

A significant impact in both treatment protocols with respect to the physical burden was found between Visit 1 and Visit 2 but no difference in physical or psychological burden between the two treatment groups was observed.

Ovarian stimulation for IVF: mild approaches

In contrast to current approaches, the aim of mild stimulation is to develop safer and more patient-friendly protocols in which the risks of the treatment as a whole are minimized. Mild stimulation is defined as the method when exogenous gonadotropins are administered at lower doses, and/or for a shorter duration in GnRH antagonist co-treated cycles, or when oral compounds (antiestrogens, aromatase inhibitors) are used for ovarian stimulation for IVF, with the aim of limiting the number of oocytes obtained to fewer than eight. In this chapter we discuss the relevant physiology of follicle development, the development of milder stimulation protocols, the implications of mild stimulation, the current state of affairs, and future developments.

Should mild stimulation be the order of the day?

Mild stimulation protocols aim to reduce the physical, financial and emotional burden associated with the conventional IVF protocol without compromising the pregnancy rate. Such protocols help to decrease the complications and the discomfort related to the prolonged administration of agonist and large doses of gonadotrophins, by limiting the number of oocytes recruited to no more than eight. The per cycle pregnancy rates are lower though the cumulative pregnancy rate in a year is equivalent. This CPR comes by going through earlier repeat cycles. Whether this reduces the physical, emotional or financial burden remains a matter of debate. There is need to standardize these protocol and do more trials to compare the two effectively. Till such time there is a clear benefit above the conventional protocol it will not be the protocol of choice with most physicians.

Auricular acupressure reduces anxiety levels and improves outcomes of in vitro fertilization: a prospective, randomized and controlled study

The study was to explore whether auricular acupressure (AA) can relieve anxiety during the period from trans-vaginal oocyte retrieval to the embryo transfer in IVF treatment and whether AA can improve the outcomes of IVF. 305 infertile patients with tubal blockage who were referred for IVF were included. The women were randomized into a control group with 102 cases, a Sham-AA group with 102 cases and an AA group with 101 cases. The anxiety levels were rated with Spielberger's State Trait Anxiety Inventory and the Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Scale. Data of clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), implantation rate (IR) and live birth rate (LBR) were obtained. The levels of neuropeptide Y (NPY) and transforming growth factor alpha (TGF-alpha) in the follicular fluids were detected with ELISA. After treatment, in AA group, the levels of state anxiety, preoperative anxiety and need-for-information were significantly lower, whereas CPR, IR, LBR and NPY levels in the follicular fluids were markedly higher than Sham-AA group and control group. We concluded that AA could help to reduce anxiety levels associated with IVF and improves the outcomes of IVF partly through increasing the levels of NPY in the follicular fluids.

LH supplementation in mild stimulations cycles without pituitary suppression: a retrospective analysis

A cohort of patients addressed to a mild stimulation protocol was retrospectively analysed aiming at evaluating the effect of a luteinizing hormone (LH) activity containing stimulation compared to a pure follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) drive in absence of any pituitary suppression. Due to a referral bias, the two groups (human FSH (hFSH) n = 210; hMG n = 105) were imbalanced for age with the hFSH group (mean age 38.4) being significantly older than the hMG group (mean age 36.8). But the clinical pregnancy rates (20%) did not differ between the groups. Secondary outcome variables showed a higher number of oocytes retrieved (3.02 vs. 2.31) and higher estradiol levels (1148 vs. 820) in the hMG/younger group whereas the fertilization rate (FR) was higher (54.8 vs. 63.8) in the FSH older/group. In spite of the LH content in the hMG product (~10 IU per vial), the LH concentration on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) was higher, although non-significantly, in the hFSH group. We suppose hCG contained in hMG inhibited to some extent the natural release of LH from the non-suppressed pituitary. Concluding, the mild stimulation clinical pregnancy rates are satisfactory independently of the treatment choice. The hMG group showed a trend for a lower efficacy. This phenomenon might be limited to non suppressed cycles, but should be taken in due account also when designing full dose controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) treatments.

A short narrative review of the feasibility of adopting mild ovarian stimulation for IVF as the current standard of care

INTRODUCTION

Mild ovarian stimulation has been conceived, proposed and implemented in clinical practice as a safer and cheaper alternative to conventional strategies of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in preparation for in vitro fertilization (IVF). Our aim was to summarize the key evidence on this topic and explore its possible role as the standard treatment option for women undergoing IVF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A short narrative review of the existing literature, with emphasis on mild ovarian stimulation clinical and cost effectiveness, as well as treatment limitations.

RESULTS

Numerous studies highlight mild ovarian stimulation's favorable characteristics with respect to oocyte/embryo quality, reduced patient risk, and ease of intervention. There is, however, a need for high-quality laboratory environment. Limitations regarding poor responders, older women, or those seeking ovarian stimulation for non-infertility indications should also be considered. Finally, outcomes on the cumulative success rates and the cost effectiveness of mild ovarian stimulation remain inconclusive.

CONCLUSION

Mild ovarian stimulation protocols for IVF should currently be implemented only in carefully selected populations. Further research is needed to clarify the remaining controversies in this IVF approach.

Long-term complications of assisted reproductive technologies

Since the birth of the first baby through in vitro fertilisation over 30 years ago, there has been a rapid increase in the number of women using assisted reproductive technologies. New techniques are constantly being introduced and are evolving rapidly. Understanding the long-term impact of these treatments, which have been linked with several potential complications affecting the mother and the child, poses a constant challenge for the scientific community. The main complications discussed in this review include the rare but serious risk of thromboembolic disease particularly in the upper half of the body and a higher risk of pregnancy complications including abnormal placentation, miscarriage, gestational diabetes and hypertensive disorders. A link between assisted conception and a number of genital cancers particularly of the breast, ovary and endometrium has also been suggested, but the evidence is currently inconclusive. A number of foetal and neonatal complications including imprinting disorders, low birth weight, congenital malformations and growth disorders are also discussed.

Physical symptoms throughout IVF cycles

The physical impact of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) is not well explored. The aim of this prospective controlled longitudinal study was to examine the impact of 11 symptoms during an entire long down regulation (LDR) cycle and to determine the effect of the mean recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (RecFSH) dose and ovarian responsiveness of patients and outcome had on reported symptoms. The severity of symptoms was measured using a daily questionnaire to determine a total summary score (TSS) for each symptom, a summary symptom score (SSS) based on all TSS and a mean daily severity for each symptom. Outcome was determined by beta human chorionic gonadotrophin (β-hCG) test result. 79.1% of women undertaking LDR IVF cycles had significant physical symptoms. Treatment symptom severity peaked at oocyte retrieval, with prominent symptoms including bloating, abdominal pain/cramps and fatigue. No relationship was found between outcome, RecFSH dose and ovarian responsiveness with reported symptoms. In conclusion, IVF places a real physical burden on women should be encouraged to reduce undertaking LDR cycles. The impact of the symptoms, particularly the increase in severity leading up to day of oocyte retrieval suggests that women may be warned to reduce stress and activities during this time.

Milder is better? Advantages and disadvantages of "mild" ovarian stimulation for human in vitro fertilization

In the last decades, several steps have been made aiming at rendering human IVF more successful on one side, more tolerable on the other side. The "mild" ovarian stimulation approach, in which a lower-than-average dose of exogenous gonadotropins is given and gonadotropin treatment is started from day 2 to 7 of the cycle, represents a significant step toward a more patient's friendly IVF. However, a clear view of its virtues and defects is still lacking, because only a few prospective randomized trials comparing "mild" vs. conventional stimulation exist, and they do not consider some important aspects, such as, e.g., thawing cycles. This review gives a complete panorama of the "mild" stimulation philosophy, showing its advantages vs. conventional ovarian stimulation, but also discussing its disadvantages. Both patients with a normal ovarian responsiveness to exogenous gonadotropins and women with a poor ovarian reserve are considered. Overall, we conclude that the level of evidence supporting the use of "mild" stimulation protocols is still rather poor, and further, properly powered prospective studies about "mild" treatment regimens are required.

Women's views on Friendly IVF: a qualitative preliminary study

OBJECTIVE

To study in the French Context women's experiences with a low-stimulation regimen of in vitro fertilisation (Friendly IVF) and to compare them with those of women undergoing standard IVF (S-IVF).

POPULATION AND METHODS

Two assisted reproduction technology centers participated in this preliminary study. Patients'views were explored qualitatively. In-depth interviews were conducted at the end of the second monitored cycle. Twelve friendly IVF patients and 13 S-IVF patients participated in the study.

RESULTS

The respondents indicated that the most positive aspect of Friendly IVF was the low doses of hormones used. Cancellation of cycles and failure of oocyte retrieval were perceived the most negatively. Women in the Friendly IVF group reported fewer side effects and expressed emotional distress less acutely than women in the S-IVF group. The Friendly IVF treatment was percieved as a first step, sustaining the hope of success with a standard treatment.

CONCLUSION

Friendly IVF, as practiced in the center studied, represents a valuable alternative for most respondents as a first step in IVF treatment.

Mild ovarian stimulation for IVF

BACKGROUND

Mild ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF) aims to achieve cost-effective, patient-friendly regimens which optimize the balance between outcomes and risks of treatment.

METHODS

Pubmed and Medline were searched up to end of January 2008 for papers on ovarian stimulation protocols for IVF. Additionally, references to related studies were selected wherever possible.

RESULTS

Studies show that mild interference with the decrease in follicle-stimulating hormone levels in the mid-follicular phase was sufficient to override the selection of a single dominant follicle. Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists compared with agonists reduce length and dosage of gonadotrophin treatment without a significant reduction in the probability of live birth (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.72-1.02). Mild ovarian stimulation may be achieved with limited gonadotrophins or with alternatives such as anti-estrogens or aromatase inhibitors. Another option is luteinizing hormone or human chorionic gonadotrophin administration during the late follicular phase. Studies regarding these approaches are discussed individually; small sample size of single studies along with heterogeneity in patient inclusion criteria as well as outcomes analysed does not allow a meta-analysis to be performed. Additionally, the implications of mild ovarian stimulation for embryo quality, endometrial receptivity, cost and the psychological impact of IVF treatment are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence in favour of mild ovarian stimulation for IVF is accumulating in recent literature. However, further, sufficiently powered prospective studies applying novel mild treatment regimens are required and structured reporting of the incidence and severity of complications, the number of treatment days, medication used, cost, patient discomfort and number of patient drop-outs in studies on IVF is encouraged.

Why do couples drop-out from IVF treatment? A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Cumulative IVF pregnancy rates are compromised by the large number of couples who drop-out of treatment before achieving pregnancy. The aim of this study was to identify the role of the treatment strategy applied, and potential other factors that influence the decision of couples to discontinue treatment.

METHODS

The incidence of drop-out from IVF treatment and factors related to drop-out were studied in a cohort of IVF patients aged <38 years embarking on IVF treatment either with a mild or a standard treatment strategy for a planned maximum number of treatment cycles.

RESULTS

Of the 384 couples studied, 17% dropped out of IVF treatment. The physical or psychological burden of treatment was the most frequent cause of drop-out (28%). The application of a mild treatment strategy (mild ovarian stimulation along with the transfer of a single embryo) significantly reduced the chance of drop-out (hazard ratio (HR) 0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31-0.96). When a mild IVF strategy was employed, the association between the baseline anxiety score and drop-out was reduced by >50%. The presence of severe male subfertility (HR 4.80; 95% CI, 1.63-14.13) and the failure to achieve embryo transfer (odds ratio 0.41; 95% CI, 0.24-0.72) were also related to drop-out.

CONCLUSIONS

Reducing drop-out rate is crucial to further improve the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of IVF treatment. An important factor determining the risk of drop-out is the burden of the treatment strategy. The application of a mild treatment strategy and managing patient's expectations might reduce drop-out rates.

Coming soon to your clinic: patient-friendly ART

The current practice in medically assisted reproduction is still too exclusively focused on effectiveness and success rates. This has a number of considerable, and more importantly, avoidable drawbacks. Single embryo transfer was an important move away from this model to include safety and welfare of mother and child. Patient-friendly ART goes one big step further. It is composed of a mix of four criteria: cost-effectiveness, equity of access, minimal risk for mother and child and minimal burden for patients. All four components have a strong normative ethical basis: cost-effectiveness relies on the optimal use of community resources to maximise well-being; equity of access is based on justice, minimal risk is founded on the fundamental non-maleficence rule and minimal burden is largely based on the autonomy principle. The inclusion of the four criteria in decision-making about treatment would express these values in clinical practice.

A mild treatment strategy for in-vitro fertilisation: a randomised non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Mild in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment might lessen both patients' discomfort and multiple births, with their associated risks. We aimed to test the hypothesis that mild IVF treatment can achieve the same chance of a pregnancy resulting in term livebirth within 1 year compared with standard treatment, and can also reduce patients' discomfort, multiple pregnancies, and costs.

METHODS

We did a randomised, non-inferiority effectiveness trial. 404 patients were randomly assigned to undergo either mild treatment (mild ovarian stimulation with gonadotropin-releasing hormone [GnRH] antagonist co-treatment combined with single embryo transfer) or a standard treatment (stimulation with a GnRH agonist long-protocol and transfer of two embryos). Primary endpoints were proportion of cumulative pregnancies leading to term livebirth within 1 year after randomisation (with a non-inferiority threshold of -12.5%), total costs per couple up to 6 weeks after expected date of delivery, and overall discomfort for patients. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Clinical Trial, number ISRCTN35766970.

FINDINGS

The proportions of cumulative pregnancies that resulted in term livebirth after 1 year were 43.4% with mild treatment and 44.7% with standard treatment (absolute number of patients=86 for both groups). The lower limit of the one-sided 95% CI was -9.8%. The proportion of couples with multiple pregnancy outcomes was 0.5% with mild IVF treatment versus 13.1% (p<0.0001) with standard treatment, and mean total costs were 8333 euros and 10745 euros, respectively (difference 2412 euros, 95% CI 703-4131). There were no significant differences between the groups in the anxiety, depression, physical discomfort, or sleep quality of the mother.

INTERPRETATION

Over 1 year of treatment, cumulative rates of term livebirths and patients' discomfort are much the same for mild ovarian stimulation with single embryos transferred and for standard stimulation with two embryos transferred. However, a mild IVF treatment protocol can substantially reduce multiple pregnancy rates and overall costs.

Aromatase inhibitors in ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI: a pilot study

This prospective randomized pilot study was aimed at investigating the effect of the novel addition of aromatase inhibitors to an ovarian stimulation protocol for IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection, on endocrine parameters including serum androgen, oestrogen, progesterone, LH and FSH concentrations. The patients were randomized to receiving letrozole (group A; n = 10), versus no letrozole (group B; n = 10) in an ovarian stimulation protocol with recombinant FSH 150 IU/day starting on day 2 of the cycle, and gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist 0.25 mg/day starting on day 6 of the cycle. Median LH concentrations were significantly higher (P < 0.01) in group A versus group B during letrozole administration. Median serum oestradiol concentrations were lower in group A versus group B, and median serum FSH, testosterone and androstenedione concentrations were higher in group A versus group B, throughout the follicular phase, without reaching significance. Median endometrial thickness was significantly higher (P < 0.05) in group A versus group B on the day of human chorionic gonadotrophin administration. Pregnancies were achieved. This pilot study supports the idea that aromatase inhibitors can contribute to normal potential of implantation and follicular response, without having negative anti-oestrogenic effects.