Successful pregnancy with restorative reproductive medicine after 16 years of infertility, three recurrent miscarriages, and eight unsuccessful embryo transfers with in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a case report
Restorative reproductive medicine represents a comprehensive approach to subfertility (infertility and miscarriage) with investigations, diagnoses, and treatments combined with fertility charting to restore optimal reproductive function. Restorative reproductive medicine assumes that multiple factors need to be identified and treated (cycle optimization) for up to 12 cycles to achieve a successful pregnancy. Conception can occur during normal intercourse without intrauterine insemination or in vitro fertilization.
CASE PRESENTATION: A 35-year-old Croatian female presented for fertility treatment in May 2019 with a previous diagnosis of polycystic ovaries, infertility of 16 years duration, and 8 unsuccessful embryo transfers with in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. She was gravida 3 para 0, with 2 miscarriages after spontaneous conception at 5-6 weeks gestation in 2002 and 2004, followed by a miscarriage after in vitro fertilization at 12 weeks gestation in 2011. We initially found poor follicle function and suboptimal progesterone levels. Restorative reproductive medicine treatment resulted in conception after two cycles of treatment. This pregnancy ended in miscarriage at 7 weeks 4 days. Additional investigations found a balanced Robertsonian translocation (13, 14) and a uterine septum. We achieved repeat fertilization with restorative reproductive medicine after three cycles of treatment following resection of the uterine septum and ovulation induction with letrozole and human chorionic gonadotrophin. She had a full-term healthy pregnancy and live birth in 2021.
Conclusion
We propose that a full evaluation of underlying factors, and up to 12 cycles of cycle optimization, should be offered to subfertile patients before considering in vitro fertilization treatment.
restorative reproductive medicine success, NaProTechnology after failed IVF, recurrent miscarriage treatment RRM, infertility 16 years case report, failed embryo transfer alternative, Creighton Model fertility assessment, RRM comprehensive subfertility approach, progesterone support pregnancy, NaPro case report successful pregnancy, restorative approach after IVF failure
PMID 35729591 35729591 DOI 10.1186/s13256-022-03465-w 10.1186/s13256-022-03465-w
Cite this article
Boyle, P. C., Stanford, J. B., & Zecevic, I. (2022). Successful pregnancy with restorative reproductive medicine after 16 years of infertility, three recurrent miscarriages, and eight unsuccessful embryo transfers with in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a case report. Journal of medical case reports, 16(1), 246. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13256-022-03465-w
Boyle PC, Stanford JB, Zecevic I. Successful pregnancy with restorative reproductive medicine after 16 years of infertility, three recurrent miscarriages, and eight unsuccessful embryo transfers with in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 2022;16(1):246. doi:10.1186/s13256-022-03465-w
Boyle, P. C., et al. "Successful pregnancy with restorative reproductive medicine after 16 years of infertility, three recurrent miscarriages, and eight unsuccessful embryo transfers with in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a case report." Journal of medical case reports, vol. 16, no. 1, 2022, pp. 246.
What is the feasibility of a prospective protocol to follow subfertile couples being treated with natural procreative technology for up to 3 years at multiple clinical sites? Overall, clinical sites had missing data for about one-third of participants, the proportion of participants responding to follow-up questionnaires during time periods when participant compensation was available (about two-thirds) was double that of time periods when participant compensation was not available (about one-third) and follow-up information was most complete for pregnancies and births (obtained from both clinics and participants). Several retrospective single-clinic studies from Canada, Ireland and the USA, with subfertile couples receiving restorative reproductive medicine, mostly natural procreative technology, have reported adjusted cumulative live birth rates ranging from 29% to 66%, for treatment for up to 2 years, with a mean women's age of about 35 years. The international Natural Procreative Technology Evaluation and Surveillance of Treatment for Subfertility (iNEST) was designed as a multicenter, prospective cohort study, to enroll subfertile couples seeking treatment for live birth, assess baseline characteristics and follow them up for up to 3 years to report diagnoses, treatments and outcomes of pregnancy and live birth. In addition to obtaining data from medical record abstraction, we sent follow-up questionnaires to participants (both women and men) to obtain information about treatments and pregnancy outcomes, including whether they obtained treatment elsewhere. The study was conducted from 2006 to 2016, with a total of 10 clinics participating for at least some of the study period across four countries (Canada, Poland, UK and USA). The 834 participants were subfertile couples with the woman's age 18 years or more, not pregnant and seeking a live birth, with at least one clinic visit. Couples with known absolute infertility were excluded (i.e. bilateral tubal blockage, azoospermia). Most women were trained to use a standardized protocol for daily vulvar observation, description and recording of cervical mucus and vaginal bleeding (the Creighton Model FertilityCare System). Couples received medical and sometimes surgical evaluation and treatments aimed to restore and optimize female and male reproductive function, to facilitate in vivo conception. MAIN The mean age of women starting treatment was 34.0 years; among those with additional demographic data, 382/478 (80%) had 16 or more years of education, and 199/659 (30%) had a prior live birth. Across 10 clinical sites in four countries (mostly private clinical practices) with family physicians or obstetrician-gynecologists, data about clinic visits were submitted for 60% of participants, and diagnostic data for 77%. For data obtained directly from the couple, 59% of couples had at least one follow-up questionnaire, and the proportion of women and men responding to fill out the follow-up questionnaires was 69% and 67%, respectively, when participant financial compensation was available, compared to 38% and 33% when compensation was not available. Among all couples, 57% had at least one pregnancy and 44% at least one live birth during the follow-up time period, based on data obtained from clinic and/or participant questionnaires. All sites reported on female pelvic surgical procedures, and among all participants, 22% of females underwent a pelvic diagnostic and/or therapeutic procedure, predominantly laparoscopy and hysterosalpingography. Among the 643 (77%) of participants with diagnostic information, ovulation-related disorders were diagnosed in 87%, endometriosis in 31%, nutritional disorders in 47% and abnormalities of semen analysis in 24%. The mean number of diagnoses per couple was 4.7. LIMITATIONS The level of missing data was higher than anticipated, which limits both generalizability and the ability to study different components of treatment and prognosis. Loss to follow-up may also be differential and introduce bias for outcomes. Most of the participating clinicians were not surgeons, which limits the opportunity to study the impact of surgical interventions. Participants were geographically dispersed but relatively homogeneous with regard to socioeconomic status, which may limit the generalizability of current and future findings. Multicenter studies are key to understanding the outcomes of subfertility treatments beyond IVF or IUI in broader populations, and the association of different prognostic factors with outcomes. We anticipate that the iNEST study will provide insight for clinical and treatment factors associated with outcomes of pregnancy and live birth, with appropriate attention to potential biases (including adjustment for potential confounders, multiple imputation for missing data, sensitivity analysis and inverse probability weighting for potential differential loss to follow-up, and assessments for clinical site heterogeneity). Future studies adequate funding to compensate clinics and participants for robust data collection, including targeted randomized trials; or a scaled-down, registry-based approach with targeted data points, similar to the multiple national and regional ART registries. Funding for the study came from the International Institute for Restorative Reproductive Medicine, the University of Utah, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, Health Studies Fund, the Primary Children's Medical Foundation, the Mary Cross Tippmann Foundation, the Atlas Foundation, the St. Augustine Foundation and the Women's Reproductive Health Foundation. The authors declare no competing interests. The iNEST study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01363596.
Restorative reproductive medicine (RRM) seeks to identify and correct underlying causes and factors contributing to infertility and reproductive dysfunction. Many components of RRM are highly suitable for primary care practice. We studied the outcomes amongst couples who received restorative reproductive medicine treatment for infertility in a primary care setting. Two family physicians in Massachusetts trained in a systematic approach to RRM (natural procreative technology, or NaProTechnology) treated couples with infertility. We retrospectively reviewed the characteristics, diagnoses, treatments, and outcomes for all couples treated during the years 1989 to 2014. We compared pregnancy and live birth by clinical characteristics using Kaplan-Meier analysis. We employed the Fleming-Harrington weighted Renyi test or the logrank test to compare the cumulative proportion with pregnancy or with live birth. Among 370 couples beginning treatment for infertility, the mean age was 34.8 years, the mean prior time trying to conceive was 2.7 years, and 27% had a prior live birth. The mean number of diagnoses per couple was 4.9. Treatment components included fertility tracking with the Creighton Model FertilityCare System (80%); medications to enhance cervical mucus production (81%), to stimulate ovulation (62%), or to support the luteal phase (75%); and referral to female laparoscopy by a surgeon specializing in endometriosis (46%). The cumulative live birth rate at 2 years was 29% overall; this was significantly higher for women under age 35 (34%), and for women with body mass index < 25 (40%). There were 2 sets of twins and no higher-order multiple gestations. Of the 63 births with data available, 58 (92%) occurred at term. Family physicians can provide a RRM approach for infertility to identify underlying causes and promote healthy term live births. Younger women and women with body mass index < 25 are more likely to have a live birth.
To study the outcomes of women with infertility or miscarriage treated with natural procreative technology (NaProTechnology or NPT), a systematic medical approach to promoting conception in vivo; and to compare the outcomes with those previously published from a general practice in Ireland. Retrospective cohort study. An urban Canadian primary care practice in which the physician had a part-time practice in NPT. Couples with infertility or recurrent miscarriage who received treatment in the practice between August 2000 and July 2006. All couples were taught to identify the fertile time of their menstrual cycles using the Creighton Model FertilityCare System (CrMS) and completed a standard NPT evaluation. Many also received additional medical treatment to enhance conception in vivo. Live birth was the primary outcome; secondary outcomes included conceptions, multiple births, low birth weight, and prematurity. A total of 108 couples received NPT and were included in the analysis, of which 19 (18%) reported having 2 or more previously unexplained miscarriages. The average female age was 35.4 years. Couples had been attempting to conceive for a mean of 3.2 years. Twentytwo participants (20%) had previously given birth; 24 (22%) had previous intrauterine insemination; and 9 (8%) had previous assisted reproductive technology. The cumulative adjusted proportion of first live births for those completing up to 24 months of NPT treatment was 66 per 100 couples, and the crude proportion was 38%. The cumulative adjusted proportion of first conceptions was 73 per 100 couples, and the crude proportion was 47%. Of the 51 couples who conceived, 12 couples (24%) conceived with CrMS instruction alone, 35 (69%) conceived with CrMS and NPT medical treatment, and 4 (8%) conceived after additional surgical treatment. All births were singleton births; 54% were born at 37 weeks' gestation or later; and 78% had birth weights of 2500 g or greater. Natural procreative technology in a family physician's office was effective in treating infertility and miscarriage with outcomes that were comparable to those in an NPT general practice in Ireland. Larger multicentre prospective studies to compare NPT directly to other forms of infertility treatment are warranted.