Have we been a little overly receptive?

Reflections
Have we been a little overly receptive?
Like

VOLUME 118, ISSUE 2, P322

Authors:

George Patounakis, M.D., Ph.D., Micah J. Hill, D.O.

Abstract:

Reflections on "Live birth after transfer of a single euploid vitrified-warmed blastocyst according to standard timing versus timing as recommended by endometrial receptivity analysis" by Doyle et al.

Read the full text here. 

Please sign in or register for FREE

Your Fertility and Sterility Dialog login information is not the same as your ASRM or EES credentials. Users must create a separate account to comment or interact on the Dialog.

Go to the profile of Pandiyan  Natarajan
7 months ago

We are too too much overly receptive.

We, as specialists in Infertility management, are too eager to welcome any new investigation or treatment without adequate proof of efficacy. This has amply been demonstrated by the introduction of too many investigations like DFI, Embryoscopes, IMSI aka MSOME or Endometrial Scratching. ERA is just one of the many that have been introduced in the last decades. 

Many of these Add ons did not add in any significant way to our understanding of the cause of Infertility or substantially improve the pregnancy rates. They only added to the cost and complexity of assisted reproduction.(1,2). This is primarily because, we often fail to apply the Null Hypothesis.

1) Add ons in Assisted Reproduction- What do they add on? https://www.bmj.com/content/364/bmj.l226/rr

2) Adjuvants in Assisted Reproductive Technology. https://www.sciresliterature.org/Gynecology/IJRMG-ID45.pdf

Professor Dr Pandiyan Natarajan.

Chief Consultant in Andrology and Reproductive Sciences.

Apollo 24/7, NOVA IVF FERTILITY,

Chettinad Super Speciality Hospital (Retired)

Professor Emeritus, The Tamil Nadu Dr MGR Medical University.