Book contents
- 50 Big Debates in Reproductive Medicine
- Series page
- 50 Big Debates in Reproductive Medicine
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Introduction
- Section I Limits for IVF
- Section II IVF Add-ons
- Section III The Best Policy
- Section IV Embryology
- Section V Ethics and Statistics
- Section VI Male-factor Infertility
- Section VII Genetics
- Section VIII Ovarian Stimulation
- 41A AMH Is a Better Predictor of Ovarian Response Than AFC
- 41B AMH Is a Better Predictor of Ovarian Response Than AFC
- 42A Pituitary Suppression Using GnRH Agonist for IVF Is Outdated
- 42B Pituitary Suppression Using GnRH Agonist for IVF Is Outdated
- 43A The Maximum Effective Dose of FSH for Ovarian Stimulation in IVF Is 300 IU
- 43B The Maximum Effective Dose of FSH for Ovarian Stimulation in IVF Is 300 IU
- 44A There Is No Place for Natural and Mild Stimulation IVF
- 44B There Is No Place for Natural and Mild Stimulation IVF
- Section IX Hormones and the Environment
- Index
- References
44B - There Is No Place for Natural and Mild Stimulation IVF
Against
from Section VIII - Ovarian Stimulation
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 November 2021
- 50 Big Debates in Reproductive Medicine
- Series page
- 50 Big Debates in Reproductive Medicine
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Introduction
- Section I Limits for IVF
- Section II IVF Add-ons
- Section III The Best Policy
- Section IV Embryology
- Section V Ethics and Statistics
- Section VI Male-factor Infertility
- Section VII Genetics
- Section VIII Ovarian Stimulation
- 41A AMH Is a Better Predictor of Ovarian Response Than AFC
- 41B AMH Is a Better Predictor of Ovarian Response Than AFC
- 42A Pituitary Suppression Using GnRH Agonist for IVF Is Outdated
- 42B Pituitary Suppression Using GnRH Agonist for IVF Is Outdated
- 43A The Maximum Effective Dose of FSH for Ovarian Stimulation in IVF Is 300 IU
- 43B The Maximum Effective Dose of FSH for Ovarian Stimulation in IVF Is 300 IU
- 44A There Is No Place for Natural and Mild Stimulation IVF
- 44B There Is No Place for Natural and Mild Stimulation IVF
- Section IX Hormones and the Environment
- Index
- References
Summary
Optimal IVF entails establishing the balance between safety, oocyte/embryo quality, pregnancy and live birth outcomes, patient views and cost. Conventional ovarian stimulation (cOS) may well result in good outcomes for the majority of couples undergoing IVF. However, for certain cohorts of patients this method may result in suboptimal responses and therefore outcomes. The question is not if natural and mild stimulation (mOS) IVF are better than conventional, but if there is no place for these at all. We should not treat all of our patients the same and must acknowledge that dismissing these protocols from the armoury of our medical practice is a mistake. As will become clear from the debate, the statement that ‘There is no place for natural and mild stimulation IVF’ is simply wrong.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- 50 Big Debates in Reproductive Medicine , pp. 230 - 234Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021