PET PET
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
Become a Friend Donate
  • About Us
    • People
    • Press Office
    • Our History
  • Get Involved
    • Become a Friend of PET
    • Volunteer
    • Campaigns
    • Writing Scheme
    • Partnership and Sponsorship
    • Advertise with Us
  • Donate
    • Become a Friend of PET
  • BioNews
    • News
    • Comment
    • Reviews
    • Elsewhere
    • Topics
    • Glossary
    • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Upcoming Events
    • Previous Events
  • Engagement
    • Policy and Projects
      • Resources
    • Education
  • Jobs & Opportunities
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
    • People
    • Press Office
    • Our History
  • Get Involved
    • Become a Friend of PET
    • Volunteer
    • Campaigns
    • Writing Scheme
    • Partnership and Sponsorship
    • Advertise with Us
  • Donate
    • Become a Friend of PET
  • BioNews
    • News
    • Comment
    • Reviews
    • Elsewhere
    • Topics
    • Glossary
    • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Upcoming Events
    • Previous Events
  • Engagement
    • Policy and Projects
      • Resources
    • Education
  • Jobs & Opportunities
  • Contact Us
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
  • Privacy Statement
  • Advertising Policy
  • Thanks and Acknowledgements
PETBioNewsNewsTwo infertility treatments found to be no better than nature

BioNews

Two infertility treatments found to be no better than nature

Published 9 June 2009 posted in News and appears in BioNews 470

Author

Alison Cranage

Image by Alan Handyside via the Wellcome Collection. Depicts a human egg soon after fertilisation, with the two parental pronuclei clearly visible.
CC0 1.0
Image by Alan Handyside via the Wellcome Collection. Depicts a human egg soon after fertilisation, with the two parental pronuclei clearly visible.

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...

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'.

Related Articles

Image by Alan Handyside via the Wellcome Collection. Depicts a human egg soon after fertilisation, with the two parental pronuclei clearly visible.
CC0 1.0
Image by Alan Handyside via the Wellcome Collection. Depicts a human egg soon after fertilisation, with the two parental pronuclei clearly visible.
Comment
9 November 2015 • 3 minutes read

Natural killer cells and fertility: unwarranted treatments flourish amid misinformation and poor regulation

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...

Image by Alan Handyside via the Wellcome Collection. Depicts a human egg soon after fertilisation, with the two parental pronuclei clearly visible.
CC0 1.0
Image by Alan Handyside via the Wellcome Collection. Depicts a human egg soon after fertilisation, with the two parental pronuclei clearly visible.
Comment
13 July 2015 • 3 minutes read

Unexplained infertility - inexplicable guidelines

by Professor Roy Homburg and 1 others

The recommendation in the 2013 NICE guideline to exclude IUI as a treatment option is based on flimsy, and sometimes mistakenly interpreted, evidence...

Image by Alan Handyside via the Wellcome Collection. Depicts a human egg soon after fertilisation, with the two parental pronuclei clearly visible.
CC0 1.0
Image by Alan Handyside via the Wellcome Collection. Depicts a human egg soon after fertilisation, with the two parental pronuclei clearly visible.
News
31 January 2014 • 2 minutes read

Medical experts question wisdom of expanding IVF access

by Chris Hardy

Fertility experts have warned that IVF is overused and is too often recommended to couples who may not need it...

Image by Alan Handyside via the Wellcome Collection. Depicts a human egg soon after fertilisation, with the two parental pronuclei clearly visible.
CC0 1.0
Image by Alan Handyside via the Wellcome Collection. Depicts a human egg soon after fertilisation, with the two parental pronuclei clearly visible.
News
9 June 2009 • 2 minutes read

Questions raised over IUI fertility technique

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...

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

« 70-year-old claimed to be world's oldest mother

Data-Label The UK's Leading Supplier Of Medical Labels & Asset Labels

RetiringDentist.co.uk The UK's Leading M&A Company.
easyfundraising
amazon

This month in BioNews

  • Popular
  • Recent
13 June 2022 • 2 minutes read

Drop in diversity of blood stem cells leads to old-age health issues

4 July 2022 • 2 minutes read

Shorter IVF protocol reduces risk of OHSS

4 July 2022 • 2 minutes read

USA scrambles to understand implications of Roe v Wade on fertility industry

4 July 2022 • 2 minutes read

Genetic and epigenetic causes of IVF embryo arrest discovered

4 July 2022 • 2 minutes read

Dutch donor-conceived people seek answers

4 July 2022 • 2 minutes read

Genetic variant increases Alzheimer's risk, especially in women

Subscribe to BioNews and other PET updates for free.

Subscribe
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS
Wellcome
Website redevelopment supported by Wellcome.

Website by Impact Media Impact Media

  • Privacy Statement
  • Advertising Policy
  • Thanks and Acknowledgements

© 1992 - 2022 Progress Educational Trust. All rights reserved.

Limited company registered in England and Wales no 07405980 • Registered charity no 1139856

Subscribe to BioNews and other PET updates for free.

Subscribe
PET PET

PET is an independent charity that improves choices for people affected by infertility and genetic conditions.

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS
Wellcome
Website redevelopment supported by Wellcome.

Navigation

  • About Us
  • Get Involved
  • Donate
  • BioNews
  • Events
  • Engagement
  • Jobs & Opportunities
  • Contact Us

BioNews

  • News
  • Comment
  • Reviews
  • Elsewhere
  • Topics
  • Glossary
  • Newsletters

Other

  • My Account
  • Subscribe

Website by Impact Media Impact Media

  • Privacy Statement
  • Advertising Policy
  • Thanks and Acknowledgements

© 1992 - 2022 Progress Educational Trust. All rights reserved.

Limited company registered in England and Wales no 07405980 • Registered charity no 1139856