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

Reprod Biomed Online. 2015 Feb;30(2):128-36. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.10.004. Epub 2014 Oct 14.

Abstract

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.

Keywords: assisted reproductive treatment; first line; in-vitro fertilization; ovarian stimulation.

Publication types

  • Review

MeSH terms

  • Canada
  • Endometriosis / therapy
  • Fallopian Tubes / surgery
  • Female
  • Fertilization in Vitro / economics
  • Fertilization in Vitro / methods*
  • Fertilization in Vitro / trends
  • Humans
  • Infertility / therapy*
  • Infertility, Female / therapy
  • Infertility, Male / therapy*
  • Male
  • Ovarian Reserve
  • Ovulation Induction / methods*
  • Pregnancy
  • Prognosis
  • Reproductive Techniques, Assisted / economics
  • Reproductive Techniques, Assisted / trends
  • Societies, Medical