You are in:Home/Publications/The possible role of natural cycle and modified natural .cycle in IVF

Prof. Abobakr Mohamed Elnashar :: Publications:

Title:
The possible role of natural cycle and modified natural .cycle in IVF
Authors: Aboubakr Mohamed Elnashar
Year: 2015
Keywords: Not Available
Journal: Middle East Fertility Society Journal
Volume: 17
Issue: Not Available
Pages: 226-228
Publisher: Not Available
Local/International: International
Paper Link: Not Available
Full paper Abobakr Mohamed Elnashar_Natural cycle 2012.pdf
Supplementary materials Not Available
Abstract:

The first successful pregnancy and live birth resulting from IVF were achieved during an unstimulated natural cycle (1). Soon thereafter, natural IVF was replaced by stimulated IVF because of the very high cancellation rates of natural cycles, and stimulated treatment became the standard in IVF. However, ovarian stimulation is not free from negative consequences and risks, including ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. (OHSS), which affects up to 5–10% of IVF cycles and can be life-threatening (2). Multiple pregnancies occur in approximately 30% of pregnancies in patients who undergo the COH protocol and this phenomenon is related to increased risks of pregnancy loss, obstetrical complications, prematurity and neonatal morbidity with long-term damage. The long-term side effects however remain largely unknown. Ovarian cancer and gestational trophoblastic disease may be associated with the chronic use of gonadotrophins (3). Nevertheless, the interest in natural IVF cycle treatment has been renewed in recent years because of the increased efficiency of IVF technology. With the increasing awareness of side effects of ovarian stimulation and better understanding of ovarian physiology in relation to ovarian follicular growth and maturation, IVF in natural cycles has gained great attention and interest for both normal responder and poor responder patients (4). 1.1. Advantages Natural IVF cycles are simple, inexpensive and rapid and side effects associated with ovarian stimulation are eliminated. Natural cycle offers a more physiological, less drugoriented, lower risk and more patient-friendly approach (4). Natural IVF cycles might be more efficient for obtaining ideal embryos. It can be repeated on a monthly basis, and the overall chances of success are therefore higher. Some patients might prefer several successive natural IVF cycles instead of stimulated IVF cycles, which can only be repeated once a month (5). It has been reported that the clinical pregnancy rate with stimulated IVF has reached approximately 25–30% (6). However, repeated stimulated cycles should span over several months to allow for the ovaries to recover. Further, if stimulated IVF cycles are repeated, the pregnancy rate will obviously decrease.

Google ScholarAcdemia.eduResearch GateLinkedinFacebookTwitterGoogle PlusYoutubeWordpressInstagramMendeleyZoteroEvernoteORCIDScopus