Assisted Reproduction · Outcomes and Effectiveness

Cumulative pregnancy probabilities among couples with subfertility: effects of varying treatments

Lynch CD, Simonsen SE, Stanford JB, Mikolajczyk RT

Published March 31, 2009 Fertility and Sterility, 93(7), 2175-2181
DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.01.080 PMID 19328479
Read our synopsis

RRM Academy Synopsis

Simulated IVF speeds pregnancy, then regular intercourse catches up

In a simulation, early IVF led at first, then regular intercourse and conservative treatment caught up within 3 years. The model followed one million couples who were not pregnant after 2 years and had no clear diagnosis. Results rest on assumptions from published studies.

Key Findings

  • Each simulated cohort began with one million couples. Couples not pregnant after 2 years (26 cycles) entered five scenarios that ran for 3 more years (39 cycles).
  • In the model, IVF gave the highest cumulative pregnancy at first, and continuous conservative treatment overtook it at nine cycles.
  • In the model, relatively frequent intercourse alone overtook IVF at 28 cycles. Less frequent intercourse alone overtook no other scenario in 39 cycles.
  • In a second comparison, IVF begun after 20 cycles of conservative treatment gave the highest cumulative pregnancy at 26 cycles, roughly 2 years in.
  • At 1 year, the model gave spontaneous pregnancy of about 33% with frequent intercourse for couples with 2 years of failed trying, and about 20% with less frequent intercourse.

Interpretation

The study is a simulation. The authors fitted each couple's chance of conceiving to natural-fertility studies and took treatment effects from published literature. The findings describe the model and come from no trial of real couples. The IVF estimates came from a Netherlands cohort. There, couples without absolute indications for IVF must first receive other treatment. The authors say IVF results may be higher in couples without earlier treatment. Sensitivity analyses kept the same overall pattern. Aging during follow-up was left out.

RRM Context

The authors list NaProTechnology among other conservative approaches and say such treatments should be tested over longer periods. They also cite a randomized trial in which timing intercourse to the fertile window produced more pregnancies in couples with reduced fertility. Cumulative results show what a short window hides. IVF bypasses the causes of delay, while cause-based evaluation looks for them.

Abstract

Objective

To model the cumulative probability of pregnancy among couples with subfertility without a definitive diagnosis, according to different treatment strategies.

Design

A beta distribution of fecundity was fitted that reproduced the cumulative probability of pregnancy in prospective studies of natural fertility, and this distribution was applied to simulated cohorts starting with one million couples each. Probabilities of pregnancy were generated for each cycle of each couple.

Setting

Simulation study.

Patients

Hypothetic subfertile population.

Interventions

After 2 or 4 years of attempting pregnancy and diagnostic evaluation to exclude anovulation, tubal obstruction, and severe male factor, simulated treatments were applied to the remaining nonpregnant couples, with treatment effects based on published literature.

Main Outcome Measures

Simulated cumulative probability of pregnancy.

Results

Initially, the cumulative probability of pregnancy was highest for early treatment with IVF, but over time, conservative treatment or frequent intercourse approached the same cumulative probability.

Conclusions

In couples without clear indications for IVF, the main benefit of early IVF may be to shorten time to pregnancy, a benefit that must be weighed against costs and potential adverse outcomes. Couples should be encouraged to maintain regular intercourse to maximize chances of pregnancy, even after unsuccessful treatment attempts.

Topics

By this author

Related research

Assisted Reproduction › Outcomes and Effectiveness › Cumulative Versus Per Cycle Reporting
Joseph B Stanford, Courtney D Lynch
Joe Stanford, Joey Stanford, J Stanford, C Lynch
PMID 19328479 19328479 DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.01.080 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.01.080 Lynch et al. 2009, Lynch 2009

Cite this article

Stanford, J. B., Mikolajczyk, R. T., Lynch, C. D., & Simonsen, S. E. (2010). Cumulative pregnancy probabilities among couples with subfertility: effects of varying treatments. Fertility and sterility, 93(7), 2175-2181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.01.080