Napro technology

littlecookie · July 2014

In my googling recurrent pregnancy loss immediately after my loss something came up in my city about some doctors here that use this method.

From what I can tell it uses some NFP approaches and is probably somewhat tied to the Catholic Church, but the doctors are OBs.

We're two cycles out from my last loss and probably getting close to being ready to TTC again. I have a call in to my ob (now that I finally have zero betas) to talk next steps, but I don't think she plans to treat me any differently moving forward. Most of the REs I found seemed to be focused on getting people pregnant and I'm not sure that's what we need right now, so I'm kind of open to other options.

Anyone have any stories about this method? Ever seen any of these practitioners?

BethKate2 · July 2014

littlecookie said:

In my googling recurrent pregnancy loss immediately after my loss something came up in my city about some doctors here that use this method. From what I can tell it uses some NFP approaches and is probably somewhat tied to the Catholic Church, but the doctors are OBs. We're two cycles out from my last loss and probably getting close to being ready to TTC again. I have a call in to my ob (now that I finally have zero betas) to talk next steps, but I don't think she plans to treat me any differently moving forward. Most of the REs I found seemed to be focused on getting people pregnant and I'm not sure that's what we need right now, so I'm kind of open to other options. Anyone have any stories about this method? Ever seen any of these practitioners?

I don't know anything about this method, but I wanted to comment about REs. Yes, their ultimate goal is to help you to get pregnant, but even if that's not what you're hoping for right now, a RE could do the necessary testing to potentially find out why you're experiencing losses.

BookishMomma · July 2014

I know a little bit about Napro, as my old OB was getting certified in it. A lot of the approach has to do with progesterone supplementation. After my 2nd loss, my old OB did put me on progesterone starting at 3dpo for any cycle we were trying (Crinone), but we never got much beyond that because I got my BFP and, with the the progesterone, it stuck longer than my prior 2 pregnancies had. However, unfortunately we lost that one, too, due to a chromosomal abnormality (45x). In fact, it stuck TOO well because, now almost 3 months out from my D&C, I found out I have retained tissue. I doubt it has anything to do with the progesterone, though. My RE wants me to continue doing progesterone after O for any future TTC cycles.

ImJessesGirl · July 2014

I ditto above, I am seeing a RE and I just find that they are so knowledgable!!! Good luck!

LaRomana09 · July 2014

I just quickly checked out their website...it seems like it is the equivalent of the Catholic church's "natural family planning" except used try to help you get pregnant. So basically charting. And if that doesn't work they will help you adopt. They even say right on the website that there is no peer reviewed medical literature to support their approach. I'd stick with an RE.

littlecookie · July 2014

Sorry for the post and run. Ended up in some meetings unexpectedly.

Thanks @bookishmama‌ for the personal experience and the rest of you who have insight. I appreciate it.

FTR, I hadn't been to the national website, only the doctors that were recommended locally and I did not see any of those claims. Just said that they specialize in a bunch of stuff including recurrent pregnancy loss. I know my doc is willing to put me on progesterone so if that's it, it won't add much.

To my RE comments, I don't know if you all have found this, but I don't have any personal recommendations for REs and all my searches seem to come up with fertility clinics that seem from their websites to focus on IVF. If any of the Houston girls have a recommendation, I'd welcome it.

Km380 · July 2014

I don't know anything about this but regarding REs, I would think your OB could recommend one. If my RE had said immediately IVF, with no concrete tests, I'd seek a second opinion. Fwiw, I've had 2 unexplained losses and my RE recommends us trying naturally w progesterone supps. If I looked at their website - yes it's a fertility clinic

shandorfml2 · July 2014

a recommendation for IVF should be the end of the line (except perhaps egg donation/surogacy and so on). No RE should/hopefully wouldn't jump right to IVF. They can help find out what is happening, like PPs said.

CallaLily30 · July 2014

As previous posters have said, my RE did not jump right to IVF either. First, we tried a timed intercourse cycle with injectable fertility meds to try to induce ovulation sooner (I have long cycles which can result in poor quality eggs). This first attempt resulted in a miscarriage as well and we are now onto IVF but it wasn't the first thing the RE recommended.

BookishMomma · July 2014

Ditto here about experience with an RE. I was afraid that, given my age (I turn 35 in 3 days), my RE would push hard for IVF. He has not done so. He has only mentioned it as an "option down the line" if we get to that point. I have been nothing but impressed by the quality of care I receive at my RE's office, and have never felt pressured. I just wanted to chime in that I think a lot of us here shared the type of fears you've expressed.

nusuagdo · July 2014

I want to preface this post by saying that different medical approaches work for different people. Just look at the debate between natural childbirth and medicated childbirth advocates. Nothing in this post is meant to be a judgment of the reproductive choices of others. Rather, this is an explanation of why NaPro has worked well for me so far. As with other medical choices, educated decision-making is key.

I have used NaPro. It worked for me in that I conceived (but ultimately lost) my first baby during my first medicated cycle after 11 cycles of TTC without supplementation. The positive side of NaPro is that it is focused on charting and can reveal issues that can be missed without consistent charting. In my experience, most GPs and OBs kind of look down on charting and dismiss it. NaPro teaches a high level of respect for the individualized nature of each woman's cycle and the variety of the same woman's possible patterns. There's a strong philosophy of working with the naturally-occuring process and correcting underlying issues rather than imposing a process. For example, the testing protocols are all cued off of days pre and post ovulation, not just cycle day. Thus, progesterone testing is done 7 days past ovulation, not necessarily on CD 21. Accordingly, because most women do not ovulate precisely on CD14 every cycle, the result will be cued more accurately to ovulation. For me, the testing showed good ovulation but serious post-ovulatory deficiency in progesterone and a 7 day luteal phase. With supplementation, I conceived.

That said, NaPro is not for everyone, particularly those who are looking to do IVF (even as a last resort). We not interested in IVF or IUI and are open to adoption if I cannot carry to term. My NaPro OB respects my feelings and is more attentive to me than any other doctor I have ever known.

As for the claim that it produces fewer miscarriages than IVF, I think that comes from the fact that IVF with frozen embryos has a higher rate of miscarriage when compared to natural conception. Since natural conception (whether aided by medication or not) is the only option under NaPro, it stands to reason that its miscarriage rate would be lower than IVF generally.

BethKate2 · July 2014

nusuagdo said:

**snip**

I have used NaPro. It worked for me in that I conceived (but ultimately lost) my first baby during my first medicated cycle after 11 cycles of TTC without supplementation. The positive side of NaPro is that it is focused on charting and can reveal issues that can be missed without consistent charting. In my experience, most GPs and OBs kind of look down on charting and dismiss it. NaPro teaches a high level of respect for the individualized nature of each woman's cycle and the variety of the same woman's possible patterns. There's a strong philosophy of working with the naturally-occuring process and correcting underlying issues rather than imposing a process. For example, the testing protocols are all cued off of days pre and post ovulation, not just cycle day. Thus, progesterone testing is done 7 days past ovulation, not necessarily on CD 21. Accordingly, because most women do not ovulate precisely on CD14 every cycle, the result will be cued more accurately to ovulation. For me, the testing showed good ovulation but serious post-ovulatory deficiency in progesterone and a 7 day luteal phase. With supplementation, I conceived.

**snip**

REs do the same thing. Anyone seeking treatment for IF who is seeing a doctor who assumes she ovulates on CD 14 needs to find a new doctor.

CallaLily30 · July 2014

nusuagdo said:

*snip*

As for the claim that it produces fewer miscarriages than IVF, I think that comes from the fact that IVF with frozen embryos has a higher rate of miscarriage when compared to natural conception. Since natural conception (whether aided by medication or not) is the only option under NaPro, it stands to reason that its miscarriage rate would be lower than IVF generally.

I'm not sure this is a true statement. My RE clinic has a very high live birth rate from FETs for my age group. 70% of transfers result in live births. They can genetically test embryos and drastically reduce miscarriages due to chromosomally anomalies.

RedTwizzlers · July 2014

There is a lot of non-science on that website. Please go to an RE. REs have many years of rigorous medical training and base their treatment plans on evidence-based medicine that comes from academic journals, not from the Pope's Institute. Also, like everyone else pointed out, charting does exactly what they're saying they do - examine your cycle to see if there are problems that can be addressed. REs do this in-depth as well. Napro is not medicine.

LaRomana09 · July 2014

snegde said:

nusuagdo said:

*snip*

As for the claim that it produces fewer miscarriages than IVF, I think that comes from the fact that IVF with frozen embryos has a higher rate of miscarriage when compared to natural conception. Since natural conception (whether aided by medication or not) is the only option under NaPro, it stands to reason that its miscarriage rate would be lower than IVF generally.
I'm not sure this is a true statement. My RE clinic has a very high live birth rate from FETs for my age group. 70% of transfers result in live births. They can genetically test embryos and drastically reduce miscarriages due to chromosomally anomalies.
You are right calla. That is not a true statement. Also their statements regarding just about everything are incorrect or in accurately skewed. Their website makes me super stabby. Also is this @nusuagdo‌ a member of this board???

First post.

And your comment made me think of this:

littlecookie · July 2014

Thank you again for everyone's responses. They called me back today, but I missed their call. Think ill just ignore for now.

My ob has ordered some tests, so I'll do some more research about REs in my area while I wait on the results and decide what to do when I get the results back.

Sorry I summoned a napro evangelist. Made me think of this other person from the nest who's nuts about fairness in restaurants (specifically ranch dressing, so weird). She pops up and goes crazy on people on stories about restaurants or when her name is mentioned. Just like Beetlejuice.

nusuagdo · July 2014

Ladies, up until this point, I have drawn a lot of support from this board after my loss on 6/11 and D&C on 6/12. I have frankly been in too much pain to post until today and I only shared my experience with NaPro in response to the OP's question. I'm sorry that I have given offense. I wasn't proselyting, just sharing my experience.

As for my statement about the higher risk of miscarriage for FET, I got it from the Mayo Clinic site. https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/in-vitro-fertilization/basics/risks/prc-20018905 It also makes sense to me that certain clinics or practices would have a better rate, as ktlovess said.

Want a personalized experience?

Napro technology

Re: Napro technology

Choose Another Board

Search Boards