Examen
Page URL: https://www.bionews.org.uk/page_90769

Two infertility treatments found to be no better than nature

12 August 2008
Appeared in BioNews 470

Two common infertility treatments are no more effective than trying to conceive naturally, according to a study published in the British Medical Journal. The study looked at the effectiveness of taking the drug clomifene citrate (CC) or having intra-uterine insemination (IUI) versus no intervention, and found that live birth rates were not significantly different.

The research was led by Professor Siladitya Bhattacharya of Aberdeen University, and studied 580 women who had experienced unexplained infertility for more than two years. The women were randomly placed into three groups - one group were encouraged to try naturally for a pregnancy and had no medical interventions; one took oral CC which is believed to correct subtle ovulatory dysfunction; and one had IUI, which is thought to enhance the chance of pregnancy by injecting sperm behind the cervical barrier. All treatments were followed for six months.

At the end of the study there had been 101 live births. Seventeen per cent of the women who were advised to conceive naturally gave birth, compared to 14 per cent of those who were taking CC and 23 per cent of those who had IUI. The study concludes that the interventions did not significantly alter the chances of having a live birth compared to having no treatment. In addition, 10 per cent of the women taking CC experienced unpleasant side effects including abdominal pain, bloating, hot flushes, nausea and headaches.

One in seven couples in the UK experience problems conceiving and, in a quarter of these cases, the infertility is unexplained. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) issued guidelines four years ago which endorses the use of up to six free cycles of IUI without ovarian stimulation, for couples with unexplained infertility. The researchers suggest the NHS could be wasting money on such treatments and call for the guidelines to be reviewed.

In an accompanying article, Tarek El-Toukhy and Yacoub Khalaf from the Assisted Conception Unit at Guy's and St Thomas's NHS Foundation Trust Hospital in London wrote: 'As a direct result of the lack of evidence, many couples with unexplained infertility endure (and even request) expensive, potentially hazardous, and often unnecessary treatments'.

SOURCES & REFERENCES
Common fertility treatments are 'no better than nature', study finds
The Times |  8 August 2008
Common infertility treatments are unlikely to improve fertility
EurekAalert |  7 August 2008
Fertility study scorns frontline treatments
The Guardian |  8 August 2008
Two fertility drugs recommended for childless couples are virtually useless, says study
The Daily Mail |  8 August 2008
RELATED ARTICLES FROM THE BIONEWS ARCHIVE
9 November 2015 - by Dr Norman Shreeve 
In recent years a range of treatments aimed at suppressing uterine natural killer activity have sprung up, but this has no scientific rationale and can have significant and dangerous side effects...
13 July 2015 - by Professor Roy Homburg and Dr Gulam Bahadur 
The recommendation in the 2013 NICE guideline to exclude IUI as a treatment option is based on flimsy, and sometimes mistakenly interpreted, evidence...
3 February 2014 - by Chris Hardy 
Fertility experts have warned that IVF is overused and is too often recommended to couples who may not need it...
17 July 2006 - by Dr Jess Buxton 
By Dr Jess Buxton: A technique commonly used to treat couples with unexplained fertility problems is ineffective for many of them, say Dutch researchers. A team based at the Academic Medical Centre and Vrije Universiteit Medical Centre in Amsterdam has shown that 30 per cent of those treated with intrauterine...
HAVE YOUR SAY
Log in to add a Comment.

By posting a comment you agree to abide by the BioNews terms and conditions


Syndicate this story - click here to enquire about using this story.