Restorative Reproductive Medicine · NaProTechnology

Natural procreative technology (NaProTechnology) for infertility: take-home baby rate and clinical outcomes in a 5-year single-center cohort of 1,310 couples

Sánchez-Méndez JI, Lombarte M, Abengózar-Muela R, Acosta-Díez J, Alonso-Fernández P, Cañones-Castañón MP, Calderón-Ruiz O, Espinosa-García E, Galocha-Morgado C, Siegrist J, Alonso-Salvador S

Published November 14, 2025 Frontiers in reproductive health, 7, 1696679
DOI 10.3389/frph.2025.1696679 PMID 41323405 PMC PMC12660242

RRM Academy Synopsis

Spanish NaProTechnology cohort had a 62% adjusted take-home baby rate

In a retrospective cohort of 1,310 infertile couples treated with NaProTechnology in Spain, about 62 out of 100 couples had a take-home baby after adjustment for time in treatment. The crude rate was about 35 out of 100. Adjusted rates fell from about 84 out of 100 at ages 18 to 30 to about 24 out of 100 above 40.

About 6 in 10 couples had a take-home baby with NaProTechnology care, adjusted for time in treatment
About 6 in 10 couples had a take-home baby with NaProTechnology care, adjusted for time in treatment. Source: Sánchez-Méndez JI et al., 2025, PMID 41323405.
Study at a glance, retrospective cohort: Many couples had a take-home baby with NaProTechnology care in Spain
Study at a glance, retrospective cohort of 1,310 infertile couples: Many couples had a take-home baby with NaProTechnology care in Spain. Source: Sánchez-Méndez JI et al., 2025, PMID 41323405.

Key Findings

  • Of 1,310 couples, 463 had a take-home baby (a live birth with the newborn discharged home), a crude rate of 35.3%.
  • Adjusted for time in the program, the cumulative rate was 62.1% (95% CI 58.8–65.4), with a median NaProTechnology duration of 10.9 months (range 8.1–17.0).
  • Adjusted rates by maternal age were 83.7% at 18–30 years, 63.2% at 31–35, 53.3% at 36–40 and 24.4% over 40 (p < 0.001).
  • Among the 360 couples with a history of ART, the take-home baby rate was 25.3%; 401 women (30.6%) had at least one surgical intervention, most often hysteroscopy.
  • Independent predictors included maternal age 18 to 30 years (OR 12.4, 95% CI 6.6–23.2) and consultation for recurrent pregnancy loss (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.7–4.3).

Interpretation

The study is a retrospective cohort of couples with primary or secondary infertility or recurrent pregnancy loss. Kaplan–Meier life tables estimate the rate of take-home babies over time in the program. The median infertility duration was 24 months, and 27.5% of couples had prior ART attempts. The authors note that dropout assumptions influence the adjusted rate: a sensitivity analysis gave 47.7%, 62.1% and 76.5% under three assumptions about couples who withdrew. The authors call the findings promising and ask for larger multicenter studies.

RRM Context

NaProTechnology, developed by Dr. Thomas W. Hilgers, treats the conditions behind infertility, guided by cycle charting with the Creighton Model FertilityCare System. At least one cause of infertility was identified in 98.1% of the couples (n = 1,285). That pattern fits the RRM view that unexplained infertility usually means an incomplete diagnosis.

Abstract

Introduction

Assisted reproductive technologies (ART) are widely used to address infertility; however, they are costly, associated with medical risks, and often yield suboptimal clinical outcomes. Natural Procreative Technology, also known as NaProTechnology (NPT), provides a systematic and integrative approach to infertility by thoroughly identifying and treating underlying medical conditions to restore the couple's natural fertility potential. Despite its promise, real-world data on NPT effectiveness remain limited. The objective of this study is to evaluate the take-home baby rate in a large population of infertile couples treated with NPT and to synthesize findings from previously published studies.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted involving 1,310 infertile couples treated at a specialized fertility clinic in Spain over a 5-year period. Participants presented with primary or secondary infertility or recurrent pregnancy loss. Clinical data, diagnoses, and outcomes were analyzed, including surgical interventions and treatment duration.

Results

The mean age of women and men was 35.0 (SD 4.4) and 36.9 (SD 5.3) years, respectively. Primary infertility was the most common subtype (73.5%), the median infertility duration was 24 months, and prior ART attempts were recorded in 27.5% of couples. Mean number of diagnoses per couple was 2.5 (SD 1.3). The crude take-home baby rate was 35.3% (N = 463). Independent predictors of successful take-home baby included female age, recurrent pregnancy loss as the reason for consultation, duration of infertility, and the presence of endometriosis, hormonal dysfunction, male factor, and endometrial disorders as diagnoses. Considering a median duration of NPT of 10.9 months (range 8.1-17.0), the adjusted cumulative take-home baby rate was 62.1%. Rates varied significantly by female age, with higher success observed in younger women: 83.7% at 18-30 years, 53.3% at 36-40 years, and 24.4% over 40 years. A sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the impact of dropout assumptions on cumulative pregnancy rates. Nearly one-third of patients underwent surgery, most commonly hysteroscopy and/or laparoscopy.

Conclusion

In this cohort, NPT was associated with a notably high take-home baby rate in an infertile population with unfavorable prognostic factors, including advanced maternal age, prolonged duration of infertility, or previous failed attempts at conventional ART procedures.

Topics

Related research

Restorative Reproductive Medicine › NaProTechnology › Cumulative Pregnancy Rates
José Ignacio Sánchez-Méndez, María Lombarte, Ricardo Abengózar-Muela, Juan Acosta-Díez, Patricia Alonso-Fernández, María Pilar Cañones-Castañón, Olga Calderón-Ruiz, Elena Espinosa-García, Carolina Galocha-Morgado, Jaime Siegrist, Sonsoles Alonso-Salvador
J Sánchez-Méndez, M Lombarte, R Abengózar-Muela, J Acosta-Díez, Pat Alonso-Fernández, Trish Alonso-Fernández, P Alonso-Fernández, M Cañones-Castañón, O Calderón-Ruiz, E Espinosa-García, C Galocha-Morgado, J Siegrist, S Alonso-Salvador
PMID 41323405 41323405 DOI 10.3389/frph.2025.1696679 10.3389/frph.2025.1696679 Sánchez-Méndez et al. 2025, Sánchez-Méndez 2025