For many women and couples undergoing IVF, the desire to boost their chances of conception can lead them down a complex web of supplementary treatments. A new review published in The Lancet Obstetrics, Gynaecology & Women's Health journal sheds light on this issue, revealing that over 70% of IVF patients in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand are paying for at least one of these extra procedures or medications.
Researchers behind the study have warned that many of these IVF add-ons lack robust scientific evidence to support their use. The review analysed data from 10 common treatments, including acupuncture, corticosteroids, and pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy, and found that most show no significant impact on fertility outcomes or have inconclusive results due to limited or poor-quality data.
The study's lead researcher, Dr Sarah Lensen of the University of Melbourne, highlighted concerns around commercialisation in private clinics, where IVF is a lucrative business. 'Infertility care is often provided by private clinics where IVF is highly commercialised,' she explained. 'This can lead to patients being sold unproven treatments that may not be in their best interests.' The review's findings should serve as a timely reminder for clinicians and patients alike, urging caution when it comes to investing in expensive and potentially ineffective add-ons.
Seven IVF add-ons were identified as having no proven effect on fertility or inconclusive results: acupuncture, corticosteroids, endometrial receptivity testing, intralipid infusion, intraovarian injection of platelet-rich plasma, intrauterine infusion of platelet-rich plasma, and pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy. While three other add-ons – EmbryoGlue (an embryo transfer medium), endometrial scratching, and physiological intracytoplasmic sperm injection (PICSI) – showed some possible benefit, the evidence was weak, and effects on live birth rates were often not robust.
NHS guidelines recommend that fertility treatments should be based on the best available evidence. Dr Lensen's team has called for greater transparency in marketing IVF add-ons, urging patients to exercise caution when faced with claims of 'miracle cures'. As Dr Lensen noted, 'the availability of unproven IVF add-ons can create unrealistic expectations and lead to unnecessary medical interventions during an already emotionally challenging time.' The study's findings are a stark reminder of the importance of evidence-based practice in fertility treatment.