Infertility Support Group
In vitro fertilization is one of the most common and utilized ways of treating conception problems. This support group is dedicated to those beginning their journey with IVF and needing support. Join the community and share your experiences, advice, and story with people going through similar challenges starting a family.
Hi all,
I'm go in for my first IVF retrieval, probably this Sunday or Monday. My RE now has a policy of using ICSI all the time, unless the patient requests that it not be used. I've seen stats that say that 50% of all IVFs are now being done with ICSI. When it was first developed, ICSI (when a single sperm is inserted into an egg with a needle) was used only to remedy "male factor," or when previous IVFs had failed. My RE says that it's being standardized now because, even when the chances are optimal (I'm 35 and we've got "unknown infertility" ...), fewer of the eggs are likely to fertilize with regular IVF. So ICSI improves your chance of having more embryos. The thing is that there's also a slightly increased chance of genetic disorders. And since ICSI is so new, the first children conceived by this method are only now just reaching puberty. Some studies suggest some developmental delays, others have shown that this isn't the case. But standardizing ICSI makes it possible for ART clinics to improve their stats. And of course, I'd like to have the best chance that the IVF will work. Are a lot of you doing ICSI when there's no male factor or other factor (like multiple IVFs)? Do you think that it's as safe as regular IVF? If we retrieve a good batch of eggs, I'm wondering if we should it split and do half with ICSI. But then, maybe I'm worrying too much. Your thoughts?
I'm go in for my first IVF retrieval, probably this Sunday or Monday. My RE now has a policy of using ICSI all the time, unless the patient requests that it not be used. I've seen stats that say that 50% of all IVFs are now being done with ICSI. When it was first developed, ICSI (when a single sperm is inserted into an egg with a needle) was used only to remedy "male factor," or when previous IVFs had failed. My RE says that it's being standardized now because, even when the chances are optimal (I'm 35 and we've got "unknown infertility" ...), fewer of the eggs are likely to fertilize with regular IVF. So ICSI improves your chance of having more embryos. The thing is that there's also a slightly increased chance of genetic disorders. And since ICSI is so new, the first children conceived by this method are only now just reaching puberty. Some studies suggest some developmental delays, others have shown that this isn't the case. But standardizing ICSI makes it possible for ART clinics to improve their stats. And of course, I'd like to have the best chance that the IVF will work. Are a lot of you doing ICSI when there's no male factor or other factor (like multiple IVFs)? Do you think that it's as safe as regular IVF? If we retrieve a good batch of eggs, I'm wondering if we should it split and do half with ICSI. But then, maybe I'm worrying too much. Your thoughts?
Thanks!
I just found out that my RE is going to use ICSI this time around. It is my 2nd IVF. We do not have male factor. We are learning more about my issues and basically it looks like my body does not want to mature an egg. Apparently the ICSI means the egg will be penetrated and the docs will know more about the maturity levels.
He assures me that there are no more genetic disorders. It does take away from natural selection, but if it means I'll get pregnant, it's ok with me!
Judging from the differences in all of our responses from our respective RE's on the subject, it appears as though the RE field may be divided on this very issue as well (which would explain our conflicting information).
This is going to sound horrible, but does anyone know if there is a substantial increase in the cost of IVF with ICSI vs without? Or perhaps ICSI produces a higher pregnancy rate and since that it what the IF clinics are rated on...well, err...could that be it?