Reply to Why is SG's FET rate with donor egg so much lower than the fresh transfer rate

Forum Index » Infertility Support and Discussion

Reply to "Why is SG's FET rate with donor egg so much lower than the fresh transfer rate"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous]I'm having a donor egg FET this week.  The stats are pretty bad, 37% live birth rate, compared with about 50% with fresh.

I asked my doctor about this and he said the stats included embryos frozen under the old methods and couples coming back for a second child, but they DON'T.  The stats say, VIA VITRIFICATION.

So why do doctors consistently say that fresh is as good as frozen and the danger of an embryo not surviving the thaw is low--I know friends when they thawed for testing always lose at least one embryo.

I only have one, and if it doesn't survive the thaw, then no transfer.  I'd rather have that than a BFN, I guess, but then they should be freezing more embryos.  EVERY lab I've talked to says the way that an embryo looks has nothing to do with the chances that it's normal.  Consistently with friends, it's not their best-looking embryos that end up being genetically normal.

Are the doctors just trying to tell us what they think we want to hear, or do they really believe what they're saying in the face of the statistics and evidence?  Has freezing/thawing/transferring suddenly gotten better than the statistics indicate?

I do know many women who have gotten pregnant from frozen embryos, particularly those that have been tested.

I don't trust this industry, but I am trying to make sense of this.

Then again, the stats don't matter once I have the transfer, IF my embryo makes it that far.  It's then a yes/no question.

I'm so tired of battling this industry for proper service and real information.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics