44 years old. What are my chances?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The fact that you conceived easily at 39 suggests that you have no tubal/immunological/uterine etc issues and that your husbands sperm is probably serviceable.

But her DH is also 4 years older, and sperm quality does go down with age. An SA is easy to do, and it should be done alongside OPs battery of tests.

All kinds of things could have happened, but most likely explanation is decline in egg quality. OP's assumption that, because she conceived easily at 39 "her fertility is good" is ignorant. Her worries about twins are, frankly, ludicrous.

[Anonymous]

I'm pretty sure at 44 that It's donor eggs or nothing. By 44 there is a huge precipitous drop off in fertility for almost everyone. No matter who great your fertility used to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HI OP, I'm 43 and conceived with my own egg with NCIVF, you should at least have a consult with DF.
http://fertilegrounds.dominionfertility.com/profiles/blogs/this-story-is-so-incredible-we-need-to-highlight-it-48-year-old

Have you also tried unsuccessfully for 4 years on you own? To me, that's more troublesome than OP's age.

She should at least give Dominion the time for a consult. Her odds might be low, and Dr D or Dr G would be honest and tell her that. Dr D told me NCIVF was a long shot and that I should think about DE or adoption. I wanted to try with my own eggs. It worked on the first try. I admit, I was lucky, but sometimes luck is on your side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HI OP, I'm 43 and conceived with my own egg with NCIVF, you should at least have a consult with DF.
http://fertilegrounds.dominionfertility.com/profiles/blogs/this-story-is-so-incredible-we-need-to-highlight-it-48-year-old

Have you also tried unsuccessfully for 4 years on you own? To me, that's more troublesome than OP's age.

She should at least give Dominion the time for a consult. Her odds might be low, and Dr D or Dr G would be honest and tell her that. Dr D told me NCIVF was a long shot and that I should think about DE or adoption. I wanted to try with my own eggs. It worked on the first try. I admit, I was lucky, but sometimes luck is on your side.

I went to Dr D at 42 with the same question and he said: Are you crazy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Responders should have to be 40+ in order to answer questions of those 40+ asking questions.

Why?

OP asked about ART options and 19:17 suggests trying naturally. That might be okay advice for someone 34, but not 44.

Many doctors argue that IVF does help - or doesn't justify the cost - after 43 or so.

What is the reasoning behind this??

[Anonymous]

OP have you checked out this dcurban post? I think the pt was treated at DF by Dr Dimetina
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/240/149805.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Responders should have to be 40+ in order to answer questions of those 40+ asking questions.

Why?

OP asked about ART options and 19:17 suggests trying naturally. That might be okay advice for someone 34, but not 44.

Many doctors argue that IVF does help - or doesn't justify the cost - after 43 or so.

What is the reasoning behind this??

The reasoning is that the number of good eggs is so small that you not going to catch any even in a stimulated cycle. if your natural odds of success are 0.2%, even if you increase them tenfold (very unlikely because at that age few are going to have 10 eggs even with all the stims) you are still only at 2%. For most people, that is not worth it. Of course somebody will always succeed and many have children at that age naturally.However, that population is different from those seeking IVF.

[Anonymous]

OP's assumption that, because she conceived easily at 39 "her fertility is good" is ignorant. Her worries about twins are, frankly, ludicrous.

What happened to "only transfer as many as you are willing to carry"? I'm new to these boards, and honestly, I'm stunned at the stone throwing. If you transfer several and get multiples and have to do a selective reduction, you get massacred for transferring more than you were willing to carry. If you're scared of multiples and only want to transfer one, you get massacred for being "ludicrous." One would think that those of us going through these difficult decisions would try to be more supportive of each other.

OP, in your situation I would transfer as many embryos as you get; it's unlikely that you will end up with healthy multiples, but if you do, there is the option of selective reduction. It's not a perfect solution (there's a chance that it can damage the surviving embryo) but transferring several and keeping the selective reduction option open is the course that is most likely to work with your own eggs at this age. Good luck--I'm just a few years younger, and in the same boat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP's assumption that, because she conceived easily at 39 "her fertility is good" is ignorant. Her worries about twins are, frankly, ludicrous.

What happened to "only transfer as many as you are willing to carry"? I'm new to these boards, and honestly, I'm stunned at the stone throwing. If you transfer several and get multiples and have to do a selective reduction, you get massacred for transferring more than you were willing to carry. If you're scared of multiples and only want to transfer one, you get massacred for being "ludicrous." One would think that those of us going through these difficult decisions would try to be more supportive of each other.

OP, in your situation I would transfer as many embryos as you get; it's unlikely that you will end up with healthy multiples, but if you do, there is the option of selective reduction. It's not a perfect solution (there's a chance that it can damage the surviving embryo) but transferring several and keeping the selective reduction option open is the course that is most likely to work with your own eggs at this age. Good luck--I'm just a few years younger, and in the same boat.

Hey, I am the PP you quoted and I never advocated "only transfer as many as you are willing to carry". I find that philosophy to be of limited applicability. Btw, I had my RE transfer 5 (3 "very good", 2 crappy) at 39 and I sure didn't intend to carry five.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm pretty sure at 44 that It's donor eggs or nothing. By 44 there is a huge precipitous drop off in fertility for almost everyone. No matter who great your fertility used to be.

It is donor or nothing. There is always the chance in a million that you are the exception. Doctors used to make a lot of money on people who try IVF at your age. New laws in effect that they have to give accurate information -- extremely unlikely. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP's assumption that, because she conceived easily at 39 "her fertility is good" is ignorant. Her worries about twins are, frankly, ludicrous.

What happened to "only transfer as many as you are willing to carry"? I'm new to these boards, and honestly, I'm stunned at the stone throwing. If you transfer several and get multiples and have to do a selective reduction, you get massacred for transferring more than you were willing to carry. If you're scared of multiples and only want to transfer one, you get massacred for being "ludicrous." One would think that those of us going through these difficult decisions would try to be more supportive of each other.

OP, in your situation I would transfer as many embryos as you get; it's unlikely that you will end up with healthy multiples, but if you do, there is the option of selective reduction. It's not a perfect solution (there's a chance that it can damage the surviving embryo) but transferring several and keeping the selective reduction option open is the course that is most likely to work with your own eggs at this age. Good luck--I'm just a few years younger, and in the same boat.

Hey, I am the PP you quoted and I never advocated "only transfer as many as you are willing to carry". I find that philosophy to be of limited applicability. Btw, I had my RE transfer 5 (3 "very good", 2 crappy) at 39 and I sure didn't intend to carry five.

PP: Did you get pregnant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP have you checked out this dcurban post? I think the pt was treated at DF by Dr Dimetina
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/240/149805.page

^^ This is a troll post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Responders should have to be 40+ in order to answer questions of those 40+ asking questions.

Why?

OP asked about ART options and 19:17 suggests trying naturally. That might be okay advice for someone 34, but not 44.

Many doctors argue that IVF does help - or doesn't justify the cost - after 43 or so.

What is the reasoning behind this??

Complete lack of success rates documented.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP's assumption that, because she conceived easily at 39 "her fertility is good" is ignorant. Her worries about twins are, frankly, ludicrous.

What happened to "only transfer as many as you are willing to carry"? I'm new to these boards, and honestly, I'm stunned at the stone throwing. If you transfer several and get multiples and have to do a selective reduction, you get massacred for transferring more than you were willing to carry. If you're scared of multiples and only want to transfer one, you get massacred for being "ludicrous." One would think that those of us going through these difficult decisions would try to be more supportive of each other.

OP, in your situation I would transfer as many embryos as you get; it's unlikely that you will end up with healthy multiples, but if you do, there is the option of selective reduction. It's not a perfect solution (there's a chance that it can damage the surviving embryo) but transferring several and keeping the selective reduction option open is the course that is most likely to work with your own eggs at this age. Good luck--I'm just a few years younger, and in the same boat.

Hey, I am the PP you quoted and I never advocated "only transfer as many as you are willing to carry". I find that philosophy to be of limited applicability. Btw, I had my RE transfer 5 (3 "very good", 2 crappy) at 39 and I sure didn't intend to carry five.

PP: Did you get pregnant?

Not on that cycle! (my third). I got pregnant naturally 2 months after that.

[Anonymous]

There is no clear answer. The Drs work off statistics, we work off hope. Each case is individualized and for every success over 40 there are hundreds/thousands more of failure. Even with unlimited financial resources,normal testing,and the best doctors, there are some things that are out of our control.