Study Finds Most IVF Add-On Treatments Lack Evidence of Benefit

A review of existing clinical trials found that most add-on treatments offered alongside in vitro fertilisation showed either no effect on fertility, inconclusive results, or only a small and uncertain benefit for a few procedures. The study, published in Lancet Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Women’s Health, examined 85 trials covering procedures such as acupuncture, corticosteroids, endometrial receptivity testing, intralipid infusion, platelet-rich plasma injection, and pre-implantation genetic testing.

Researchers reported that 72 of 157 potentially eligible trials were excluded on trustworthiness grounds. They stated that the quality of evidence for the remaining studies was often poor.

The review found no effect or inconclusive results for acupuncture, corticosteroids, endometrial receptivity testing, intralipid infusion, platelet-rich plasma injection or infusion, and pre-implantation genetic testing in people without a family history of chromosomal conditions.

Three add-ons showed weak evidence of possible benefit. EmbryoGlue was associated with an approximate 25 percent increase in pregnancy probability and some improvement in live birth rates, though the effect on live births was not considered robust. Endometrial scratching of the womb lining showed limited evidence of a 20 percent increase in live birth probability.

Physiological intracytoplasmic sperm injection showed limited evidence of a 40 percent reduction in miscarriage rates, but no clear improvement in live birth rates.

A second study found that 92 percent of surveyed IVF patients in Australia relied heavily on clinic websites for information and more than 60 percent used social media platforms such as Facebook and Reddit. One researcher stated that private clinic websites and patient forums often overstate benefits while omitting costs and risks.