A study published today in Europe's leading reproductive medicine journal, Human Reproduction, has found that for the majority of women, the chances of pregnancy are just as good if doctors rely on the woman's natural menstrual cycle.

The researchers' view is that, in 60% to 70% of cases, a series of treatment cycles without using ovarian stimulation would be safer, less stressful and mean fewer multiple births.

It also costs only a fifth of the price of current practice and would bring in vitro fertilization (IVF) within the reach of more childless couples worldwide and enable countries that state-fund IVF to help more women.

Dr. Geeta Nargund and colleagues reached their conclusion following a study of 181 treatments in 52 women at the Assisted Conception Unit at King's College Hospital, London. All the women had treatment based around their natural menstrual cycles.

They were found to have the same chance of having a baby after an average of three to four cycles of treatment as women undergoing conventional drug-stimulated treatment -­ about a third (32% as against 34%).

The first test-tube baby -­ born in 1978 in England -­ was the result of normal menstrual cycle IVF treatment, but the practice was pretty well abandoned with the onset of extensive use of hormonal drugs to stimulate the ovaries into producing more eggs per cycle.

This new study is the first to establish that basing treatment on a woman's natural cycle can achieve results comparable with those of drug-stimulated cycles.

(Reference: Cumulative conception and live birth rates in natural [unstimulated] IVF cycles. Human Reproduction. Vol.16. No 2. pp.259-262.)

31-Jan-2001