To determine the live birth rate for patients who chose to undergo treatment with Restorative Reproductive Medicine (RRM) after previous IVF (includes ICSI). To look at birth outcomes with RRM after IVF, particularly rates of twin and higher order pregnancies, premature birth, low birth weight, and potential cost savings achieved with RRM.
Setting
Two outpatient clinics in Ireland providing advanced RRM treatment of infertility.
Materials and Methods
All patients presenting between January 2004 and January 2010, with a history of infertility and previous IVF treatment were included if they proceeded beyond the initial consultation and began treatment. Main outcome is live birth per couple calculated using life table analysis.
Results
403 patients met the study criteria, among which 74 had a subsequent live birth. These women had significant negative predictive characteristics for healthy live birth including: advanced reproductive age (average 37.2 years), an average of 5.8 years of infertility with 2.1 (range 1-9) previous IVF attempts, with only 5% having previously had a live birth from IVF. Despite these undesirable prognostic indicators, the overall RRM live birth rate was 32.1% (crude 18.4%). Women aged 35-38 had a live birth rate of 37.5% (crude 23.6%) and older women over 40 had a live birth rate of 27.4% (crude 16.0%). The average birth weight was 3374g (7lb 7oz) with 92% being born at 37+ weeks and no very low birth weight babies. There was only one twin pregnancy in the study population; the potential health care savings for avoidable multiple pregnancies in these patients was estimated at £205 672 (USD$284 915).
Conclusions
Patients who have already tried IVF can achieve comparable live birth outcomes with RRM compared to another cycle of IVF. RRM has a low risk of twin or multiple births, and very good neonatal outcomes with a potential cost savings to the health care system.
Boyle de Groot Andralojc Parnell RRM after failed IVF healthy singleton pregnancies, restorative reproductive medicine live birth rate post-IVF NaProTECHNOLOGY outcomes, singleton pregnancy reduced twin rate RRM versus IVF birth outcomes comparison, International Institute for Restorative Reproductive Medicine Dublin outcomes, NaProTECHNOLOGY treatment infertility after IVF failure 29.1% live birth rate, lower multiple pregnancy rate RRM single embryo natural conception outcomes, Frontiers in Medicine 2018 RRM post-IVF cohort study reproductive outcomes, failed IVF alternative treatment restorative reproductive medicine approach, cervical mucus cycle monitoring NaProTECHNOLOGY surgical treatment post-IVF, reduced prematurity neonatal admission RRM versus IVF obstetric outcomes
PMID 30109231 30109231 DOI 10.3389/fmed.2018.00210 10.3389/fmed.2018.00210
Cite this article
Boyle, P. C., de Groot, T., Andralojc, K. M., & Parnell, T. A. (2018). Healthy Singleton Pregnancies From Restorative Reproductive Medicine (RRM) After Failed IVF. Frontiers in Medicine, 5, 210. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2018.00210
Boyle PC, de Groot T, Andralojc KM, Parnell TA. Healthy Singleton Pregnancies From Restorative Reproductive Medicine (RRM) After Failed IVF. Front Med (Lausanne). 2018;5:210. doi:10.3389/fmed.2018.00210
Boyle, Phil C., et al. "Healthy Singleton Pregnancies From Restorative Reproductive Medicine (RRM) After Failed IVF." Frontiers in Medicine, vol. 5, 2018, p. 210.
Hypoandrogenemia is not usually considered as a potential cause of recurrent miscarriage. We present the case of a 30-year-old female with 6 previous pregnancies resulting in one live birth and 5 pregnancy losses, including fetal demise at 24 weeks gestation. She had standard investigations after her 4th loss, at a specialized miscarriage clinic. Lupus anticoagulant, anticardiolipin antibodies, thyroid function, parental karyotypes were all normal. Fetal products confirmed triploidy for her 4th miscarriage at 16 weeks gestation. She was reassured and advised to conceive again but had fetal demise after 24 weeks gestation. This was her 5th pregnancy loss with no explanation. She attended our Restorative Reproductive Medicine (RRM) clinic in January 2022. In addition to poor follicle function, we found hypoandrogenemia for the first time. Treatment included follicle stimulation with clomiphene and DHEA 25 mg twice daily pre-conception with DHEA 20 mg once daily maintained throughout pregnancy. She delivered a healthy baby boy by cesarean section at 36 weeks gestation in November 2023. Hypoandrogenemia should be considered as a contributory factor for women with recurrent miscarriage or late pregnancy loss. Restoration of androgens to normal levels with oral DHEA is safe and can improve pregnancy outcome.
Contraception/ComparisonReproductive Endocrinology
Open Access
Hormone-based contraception disrupts hormonal balance, creating artificial states of anovulation and threatening women's health. We reviewed its main adverse effects and mechanisms on accelerated ovarian aging, mental health (emotional disruptions, depression, and suicide), sexuality (reduced libido), cardiovascular (brain stroke, myocardial infarction, hypertension, and thrombosis), and oncological (breast, cervical, and endometrial cancers). Other "collateral damage" includes negative effects on communication, scientific mistrust, poor physician-patient relationships, increased patient burden, economic drain on the healthcare system, and environmental pollution. Hormone-sensitive tumors present a dilemma owing to preventing some cancers vs. higher risk for others remains controversial, with denial or dismissal as non-relevant adverse effects, information avoidance, and modification of scientific criteria. This lack of clinical assessment poses challenges to women's health and their right to autonomy. Overcoming these challenges requires an anthropological integration of sexuality, as the focus on genital bodily union alone fails to encompass the intimate relational expression of individuals, complete sexual satisfaction, and the intertwined feelings of trust, safety, tenderness, and endorsement of women's femininity.
Fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs) educate about reproductive health and enable tracking and interpretation of physical signs, such as cervical fluid secretions and basal body temperature, which reflect the hormonal changes women experience on a cyclical basis during the years of ovarian activity. Some methods measure relevant hormone levels directly. Most FABMs allow women to identify ovulation and track this "vital sign" of the menstrual or female reproductive cycle, through daily observations recorded on cycle charts (paper or electronic). Physicians can use the information from FABM charts to guide the diagnosis and management of medical conditions and to support or restore healthy function of the reproductive and endocrine systems, using a restorative reproductive medical (RRM) approach. FABMs can also be used by couples to achieve or avoid pregnancy and may be most effective when taught by a trained instructor. Information about individual FABMs is rarely provided in medical education. Outdated information is widespread both in training programs and in the public sphere. Obtaining accurate information about FABMs is further complicated by the numerous period tracking or fertility apps available, because very few of these apps have evidence to support their effectiveness for identifying the fertile window, for achieving or preventing pregnancy. This article provides an overview of different types of FABMs with a published evidence base, apps and resources for learning and using FABMs, the role FABMs can play in medical evaluation and management, and the effectiveness of FABMs for family planning, both to achieve or to avoid pregnancy.
AndrologyInsulin Resistance and Testicular FunctionMale Insulin SensitivityMetabolic Syndrome Hormonal Effects
Open Access
A cohort of 141 males (18-80 yo, 42.9 ± 12.9) strongly suspected of being Insulin Resistant (IR) was prospectively studied by determining their insulin sensitivity (Pancreatic Suppression Test, PST) and testicular function (total testosterone and SHBG). The subjects were labeled as IR when the Steady State Plasma Glucose (SSPG) was ≥150 mg/dL and Non-Insulin Resistant (NIR) when SSPG was <150 mg/dl; similarly, the subjects were labeled as Hypogonadal (HYPOG) when total testosterone was ≤3.0 ng/mL and Eugonadal (EUG) when total testosterone was >3.0 ng/mL. Two out of three subjects turned out to be IR, while around one in four subjects were HYPOG. Contingency analysis indicated a significant interdependence between insulin resistance and hypogonadism (chi-square was 4.69, p = 0.0303). Age (>43 yo) predicted hypogonadism (AUROC 0.606, p = 0.0308). Twice as many HYPOG subjects were IR as compared with EUG subjects. Also, HYPOG subjects exhibited higher SSPG values as compared with EUG subjects. Statistically, neither Weight nor BMI predicted hypogonadism, while Waist Circumference (>110 cm) was only a mediocre predictor (AUROC 0.640, p = 0.009). SSPG (>224 mg/dL) on the other hand, was the best predictor of hypogonadism (AUROC 0.709, p = 0.002), outperforming Waist Circumference (half of the subjects with an SSPG >224 mg/dL were HYPOG). Age did not predict insulin resistance, while Weight (>99 kg), BMI (>29), and especially, Waist Circumference (>99 cm, AUROC 0.812, p < 0.0001) were all predictors of insulin resistance. Almost 90% of the subjects with a waist circumference >99 cm was IR. As a logical consequence of the selection criteria (various clues suggesting insulin resistance), most subjects with normal weight in this cohort were IR (53.3%) while 20% were HYPOG. On the other hand, 13.6% of the obese subjects were NIR, and 2 out of 3 of them were both NIR and EUG. In conclusion, Waist Circumference predicted both insulin resistance (>99 cm) and hypogonadism (>110 cm), suggesting that the first hit of abdominal obesity is insulin resistance and the second hit is male hypogonadism. Normal weight did not protect from IR, while a relevant proportion of obese subjects were NIR (with 2/3 being also EUG).