Success Rates in Unexplained Infertility
This study (quoted on this FAQ) reflects what I’ve been thinking. I’ve highlighted the parts that stood out to me.
Cumulative pregnancy rates in couples with anovulatory infertility compared with unexplained infertility in an ovulation induction programme.
Tadokoro N, Vollenhoven B, Clark S, Baker G, Kovacs G, Burger H, Healy D
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
Using a retrospective analysis, we compared cumulative pregnancy rates, early pregnancy failure rates and multiple pregnancy rates in couples with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) (n = 148), hypogonadotrophic or eugonadotrophic hypogonadism (n = 91) and unexplained infertility (n = 117), who were treated in an ovulation induction clinic between January 1991 and December 1995. The women were treated with either human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) or purified follicle stimulating hormone (FSH). The cumulative pregnancy rate (derived from life-table analysis) after four ovulatory treatment cycles was 70% in the PCOS group, 74% in the hypogonadism group and 38% in the unexplained infertility group. The cumulative pregnancy rate in the unexplained infertility group was significantly lower than the other groups (P < 0.001) but there was no significant difference between PCOS and hypogonadism using the log rank test. The early pregnancy failure rate was 25% in the PCOS group, 27% in the hypogonadism group and 26% in the unexplained infertility group (chi(2) = 0.132, not significant). The multiple pregnancy rate was 20% in the PCOS group, 30% in the hypogonadism group and 17% in the unexplained infertility group (chi(2) = 2.105, not significant). Treatment of anovulatory infertility using HMG or FSH is effective irrespective of the cause. Couples with unexplained infertility are less successfully treated using HMG: correction of unexplained infertility may involve more than simple correction of possible subtle ovulatory defects.
Basically, ovulation induction as a means of infertility treatment doesn’t work half as good for those with unexplained than those who have some form of anovulation disfunction. Which is completely logical – in most cases with those who are anovulatory your main battle is going to be ovulation, and it appears most of the time that’s all you need. But for those of us for whom that is not a problem, ovulating “more” or “better” isn’t going to make a huge difference in the end result.
This only strengthens my opinion that we should move to IVF sooner rather than later. Sigh.
Hey Natalie, chin up. I know you’re an internet wonk and drilling though every statistic that you can come a across on the internet but really, those are just statistics. You have a lot in your favor – for one thing, you are young – believe me, it is the MOST IMPORTANT factor in the success of infertility treatment. Also, one thing about “unexplained” that is good is that so many people do get pg on their own – some statistics say 60% over four years. People with other issues (e.g., PCOS, bad tubes) have much lower natural pg rates. When you combine that with your age, you really have every reason to believe that YOU WILL CONCEIVE and have a baby. It just may take longer than expected. And keep trying naturally too!