Should IVF be used as first-line treatment or as a last resort? A debate presented at the 2013 Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society meeting. Issue 2 (February 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Huang, Lina N.; Tan, Justin; Hitkari, Jason; Dahan, Michael H.
• Is Part Of: Reproductive biomedicine online. Volume 30:Issue 2(2015)
• Page Start: 128
• Page End: 136
• Publication Date: 2015-02
• Subjects: Human reproductive technology -- Periodicals; Human embryo -- Periodicals; Reproduction -- Periodicals; 616.692
• DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.10.004
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1472-6483

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="author" id="ab0010"> <title id="st0010">Abstract</title> <sec> <p id="sp0010">Infertility outcomes can be influenced by many factors. Although a number of treatments are offered, deciding which one to use first is a controversial topic. Although IVF may have superior efficacy in achieving a live birth with a reasonable safety profile, the availability of cheaper and less invasive treatments preclude its absolute use. For this reason, certain patient groups with 'good-prognosis' infertility are traditionally treated with less invasive treatments first. 'Good-prognosis' infertility may include unexplained infertility, mild male factor infertility, stage I or II endometriosis, unilateral tubal blockage and diminished ovarian reserve. Here, evidence behind the use of IVF as a first-line treatment is compared with its use as a last-resort option in women with 'good-prognosis' infertility.</p> </sec> </abstract>