Jenny!!!

Re: Jenny!!!

• micheleleigh

  March 2009

  Dr. B told me this as well at my IVF consultation. She said that there is not enough evidence out there to prove that this diagnosis is real or that negative results mean anything at all in regards to success rates of an IVF cycle.

  Report0 Reply
• Loading the player...
• NYGrlAtHeart

  March 2009

  After what Jenny has gone through it is so hard to believe they are wrong, ya know???

  

  Report0 Reply
• micheleleigh

  March 2009

  Yeah, I don't know what to think about it. On one hand, it may explain why Jenny did not find success at RRC. I hope that her Lupron treatment will lead to her BFP, since she is so deserving of it. However, this test doesn't really make sense to me. If it were really that cut and dry, wouldn't all clinics offer this test? After all, they have to report each case, whether it is successful or not, to the CDC and to SART. I'm also factoring in that only a small number of clinics in the country offer the test, because apparently it is controversial. I gather from Jenny that the test is easy to administer and that it's about the same complexity as an HSG, so what's stopping RRC from offering it if it is guaranteed to boost success rates for unexplained cases?

  I don't want to sound like the cheerleader for RRC, because I'm not. Dr. B has really upset me in the past, and I really considered canceling my cycle altogether about a month ago. However, I don't know why Dr. B/L and all clinics wouldn't offer this test if would improve pregnancy rates. Something about the whole situation just doesn't quite make sense to me. RRC does not have the same success rates as CCRM, but their pregnancy rates are comparable to or higher than any clinic in KS, NE, MO, or OK (at least according to SART). I think they must be doing something right.

  Report0 Reply
• Tryingtogetpregnant member

  March 2009

  Hey there....

  Sorry - I was out to lunch during this post. First off, you can still get pg if you have negative integrins - your chances are just MUCH lower. There was a study recently done in NC that showed you have a 2/13 chance of getting pg if your biopsy comes back negative. Therefore, your chances are not zero, but they are not as good. Second, there are false negatives/positives that can occur. They are very rare in the 9-11 DPO range as mine was taken; however, they can still occur. By doing the treatment, it does not ensure that I will 100% get pg; however, it will definitely help my odds. Let's say for a moment that my biopsy really was positive - what did I lose with the treatment? One month of time. If it really is negative (it's about 95% accurate), then I just gained an 86% chance of pregnancy instead of 2/13. To me, it's worth it to treat it.

  As for RRC vs. CCRM, I am not going to get into that debate. I do think there is a reason that the stats lie where they do between the two clinics and I do think there is a reason that there is a difference in the best in a state or region vs. the best in the world. Testing is expensive. This biopsy is an easy thing to perform, but it definitely takes skill, training, knowledge, research and labs to perform it in. I have been told by an RRC employee that these are just not in the cards for this test at RRC. That does not mean they are a bad clinic. They are just not on the forefront of technology. I also know that the IF health boards are asking top RE clinics to stop using PGD as it can be harmful to an IVF cycle and start learning CGH. I have seen no attempt by RRC to do this. They recommended PGD to us. So, I am not here to say that RRC is bad and CCRM is good. I am also not here to say that we have a 100% chance of getting pregnant with CCRM. I am just saying that for me I will take my chances on what CCRM is telling me any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

  Sorry this is so long! If you have questions, let me know.

   

  Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml

  Report0 Reply