I recently saw an online article from KABC-TV in Los Angeles titled “Mini IVF Provides Fertility Alternative” and wanted to provide some additional insights and comments on the subject. The idea of “mini-IVF” has received a lot of positive media attention lately as an alternative to “traditional” IVF. Often touted as being cost effective since less medication is used and producing better quality eggs in IVF, there is no evidence to support these assertions. In fact, recent years have seen a dramatic improvement in “traditional” stimulated IVF with rising pregnancy rates, safer outcomes with single embryo transfer and a reduced risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome through improved embryo freezing technology and alternative stimulation strategies.
There really is nothing new about “mini-IVF.” This approach was tried more than 30 years ago but due to the low efficiency stimulated IVF became the norm – and for good reason. While one mini-IVF expert in this article recommend mini-IVF for women “who are good candidates to produce high-quality eggs, ” these are the individuals who do best with stimulated IVF with delivery rates from eSET exceeding 60% and most with other high quality embryos cryopreserved so they don’t have to go through another egg retrieval. While there is still a long way to go in improving IVF, mini-IVF does not appear to be the path forward.
Article Referenced: http://abc7.com/science/mini-ivf-provides-fertility-alternative/74189/
Blog post by Dr. Eric J. Forman, MD, FACOG
Reproductive Medicine Associates of New Jersey