Abstract
Mild stimulation is defined as the method when exogenous gonadotropins are administered at lower doses, and/or for a shorter duration in gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist co-treated cycles, or when oral compounds (antiestrogens, aromatase inhibitors) are used for ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF), with the aim of limiting the number of oocytes obtained to fewer than eight. The ideology that obtaining increased quantity of oocytes leads to better pregnancy rates might be unjustified and contradictory. Retrieval of a modest number of oocytes following mild stimulation is associated with higher implantation rates compared with patients following conventional stimulation. With data to suggest comparable outcomes between mild ovarian stimulation and conventional stimulation protocols but fewer complications, lower costs, and significantly fewer dropouts in mild protocols, there is merit in considering these patient-friendly approaches. The mild stimulation approach, especially when linked to selected single embryo transfer, may represent an important step towards the objective of an easier IVF, more tolerable and problem-free for patients, and cheaper for both patients and the society, with yet an acceptable effectiveness in terms of live birth rates. The issue of embryo cryopreservation is important to consider during discussion of the pros and cons of mild stimulation. Although live birth rates have traditionally been reported per cycle of IVF treatment, more attention is now being given to the cumulative live birth rate from a course of treatment including multiple fresh and frozen embryo transfers. Natural cycle IVF and minimal stimulation IVF are here to stay. The IVF Lite protocol based on a minimal stimulation protocol including Clomiphene citrate and human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG), vitrification, and cryopreserved remote embryo transfers (rET) has yielded much higher pregnancy rates than fresh transfers. IVF Lite includes embryo accumulation and vitrification (ACCU-VIT) over a few cycles for poor responders and older women. For women with previous IVF failures and hyper-responders, we can complete the ACCU-VIT segment in one cycle. IVF Lite is the future of assisted reproduction. In the future, more data on live birth rates in both mild and conventional stimulation IVF is still required for proper and accurate comparison.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Allahbadia GN. Have we finally written the obituary for conventional IVF? IVF Lite. 2014;1:1–5.
Baart EB, Martini E, Eijkemans MJ, Van Opstal D, Beckers NG, Verhoeff A, et al. Milder ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization reduces aneuploidy in the human preimplantation embryo: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2007;22:980–8. doi:10.1093/humrep/del484.
Bodri D, Kawachiya S, De Brucker M, Tournaye H, Kondo M, Kato R, Matsumoto T. Cumulative success rates following mild IVF in unselected infertile patients: a 3-year, single-centre cohort study. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;28(5):572–81. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.01.002. Epub 2014 Jan 24.
Check JH, Choe JK, Cohen R. Successful pregnancy following a single fresh embryo transfer in a 45-year-old woman whose early follicular phase serum follicle stimulating hormone was 29 mIU/ml. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2011;38(4):335–7.
Craft I, Gorgy A, Hill J, Menon D, Podsiadly B. Will GnRH antagonists provide new hope for patients considered “difficult responders” to GnRH protocols? Hum Reprod. 1999;14(12):2959–62.
Devreker F, Pogonici E, De Maertelaer V, Revelard P, Van den Bergh M, Englert Y. Selection of good embryos for transfer depends on embryo cohort size: implications for the ‘mild ovarian stimulation’ debate. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:3002–8.
Fauser BCJM, Devroey P, Macklon NS. Multiple births resulting from ovarian stimulation for subfertility treatment. Lancet. 2005;365:1807–16.
Gandhi GN, Allahbadia GN, Kagalwala S, Khatoon A, Hinduja R, Allahbadia A. IVF lite – a new strategy for managing poor ovarian responders. ivflite. 2014;1:22–8.
Ginsburg ES, Baker VL, Racowsky C, Wantman E, Goldfarb J, Stern JE. Use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and preimplantation genetic screening in the United States: a society for assisted reproductive technology writing group paper. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:865–8. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.07.1139.
Heijnen EMEW, Eijkemans MJC, de Klerk C, Polinder S, Beckers NGM, Klinkert ER, Broekmans FJ, Passchier J, Te Velde ER, Macklon NS, Fauser BCJM. A mild treatment strategy for in-vitro fertilization: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2007;369:743–9.
Jones HW. Seven roads travelled well and seven to be travelled more. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:853–6.
Kably Ambe A, Esteves Gonzalez S, Carballo Mondragon E, Durán Monterrosas L. Comparative analysis of pregnancy rate/captured oocytes in an in vitro fertilization program (in Spanish). Ginecol Obstet Mex. 2008;76:256–60.
Kato K, Takehara Y, Segawa T, Kawachiya S, Okuno T, Kobayashi T, Bodri D, Kato O. Minimal ovarian stimulation combined with elective single embryo transfer policy: age-specific results of a large, single-centre, Japanese cohort. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2012;10:35. doi:10.1186/1477-7827-10-35.
Kawachiya S, Matsumoto T, Bodri D, Kato K, Takehara Y, Kato O. Short-term, low-dose, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug application diminishes premature ovulation in natural-cycle IVF. Reprod Biomed Online. 2012;24(3):308–13.
Kim CH, Kim SR, Cheon YP, Kim SH, Chae HD, Kang BM. Minimal stimulation using gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist and recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone versus GnRH antagonist multiple-dose protocol in low responders undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril. 2009;92(6):2082–4.
Luke B, Brown MB, Wantman E, Lederman A, Gibbons W, Schattman GL, et al. Cumulative birth rates with linked assisted reproductive technology cycles. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2483–91. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1110238.
Matsuura T, Takehara Y, Kaijima H, Teramoto S, Kato O. Natural IVF cycles may be desirable for women with repeated failures by stimulated IVF cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2008;25(4):163–7.
Melie NA, Adeniyi OA, Igbineweka OM, Ajayi RA. Predictive value of the number of oocytes retrieved at ultrasound-directed follicular aspiration with regard to fertilization rates and pregnancy outcome in intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment cycles. Fertlil Steril. 2003;80:1376–9.
Pelinck MJ, Vogel NE, Hoek A, Simons AH, Arts EG, Mochtar MH, Beemsterboer S, Hondelink MN, Heineman MJ. Cumulative pregnancy rates after three cycles of minimal stimulation IVF and results according to subfertility diagnosis: a multicentre cohort study. Hum Reprod. 2006;21(9):2375–83.
Revelli A, Chiadò A, Dalmasso P, Stabile V, Evangelista F, Basso G, Benedetto C. “Mild” vs. “long” protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in patients with expected poor ovarian responsiveness undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF): a large prospective randomized trial. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014;31(7):809–15.
Schimberni M, Morgia F, Colabianchi J, Giallonardo A, Piscitelli C, Giannini P, Montigiani M, Sbracia M. Natural-cycle in vitro fertilization in poor responder patients: a survey of 500 consecutive cycles. Fertil Steril. 2009;92(4):1297–301.
Society of assisted reproductive technology clinic outcome reporting system. 2010 Clinic summary report. https://www.sartcorsonline.com/rptCSR_PublicMultYear.aspx?ClinicPKID=0
Stanger JD, Yovich JL. Follicle recruitment determines IVF productivity rate via the number of embryos frozen and subsequent transfers. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;27(3):286–96. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.05.015. Epub 2013 Jun 19.
Stern JE, Hickman TN, Kinzer D, Penzias AS, Ball GD, Gibbons WE. Can the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System (SART CORS) be used to accurately report clinic total reproductive potential (TRP)? Fertil Steril. 2012;97:886–9. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.01.091.
Sunkara SK, Rittenberg V, Raine-Fenning N, Bhattacharya S, Zamora J, Coomarasamy A. Association between the number of eggs and live birth in IVF treatment: an analysis of 400,135 treatment cycles. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:1768–74.
Teramoto S, Kato O. Minimal ovarian stimulation with clomiphene citrate: a large-scale retrospective study. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;15(2):134–48.
Treff NR, Scott Jr RT. Jr Methods for comprehensive chromosome screening of oocytes and embryos: capabilities, limitations, and evidence of validity. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012;29:381–90. doi:10.1007/s10815-012-9727-9.
Van der Gaast MH, Eijkemans MJ, van der Net JB, de Boer EJ, Burger CW, van Leeuwen FE, Fauser BCJM, Macklon NS. Optimum number of oocytes for a successful first IVF treatment cycle. Reprod Biomed Online. 2006;13:476–80.
Verberg MFG, Eijkemans MJC, Macklon NS, Heijnen EMEW, Baart EB, Hohmann FP, Fauser BCJM, Broekmans FJ. The clinical significance of the retrieval of a low number of oocytes following mild ovarian stimulation for IVF: a meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2009;15:5–12.
Weghofer A, Margreiter M, Bassim S, Sevelda U, Beilhack E, Feichtinger W. Minimal stimulation using recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone and a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist in women of advanced age. Fertil Steril. 2004;81(4):1002–6.
Zhang J, Chang L, Sone Y, Silber S. Minimal ovarian stimulation (mini-IVF) for IVF utilizing vitrification and cryopreserved embryo transfer. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010;21(4):485–95.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer India
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Allahbadia, G.N., Gandhi, G., Allahbadia, A. (2015). Lessons Learned and Future Challenges. In: Allahbadia, G., Nitzschke, M. (eds) Minimal Stimulation and Natural Cycle In Vitro Fertilization. Springer, New Delhi. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-1118-1_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-1118-1_12
Publisher Name: Springer, New Delhi
Print ISBN: 978-81-322-1117-4
Online ISBN: 978-81-322-1118-1
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)