IVF Pregnancy Rates at CHR
As every year, we are offering CHR’s preliminary cycle outcomes as early as possible.
Here reported outcomes do not include live birth rates, since those are not fully available yet. Live birth rates are annually reported to the CDC and to SART. Click here to see the preliminary 2019 outcomes SART report, the last year for which such data is available.
Below are a few additional reminders that must be considered in correctly interpreting our Center’s 2019 Data.
- CHR serves a highly adversely selected patient population. One good example of this adverse selection is the observation that between 2017 and 2020, the median age for CHR’s IVF patients has been between 42 and 43 years. In contrast, national IVF cycle data for those years reported median ages around 36 years. The pie chart confirms the adverse selection of our patient population further by demonstrating that more than half of the fresh non-donor egg cycles occurred in women aged 42 and above.
- Over 90% of patients reaching CHR have previously failed, often multiple IVF cycles at other IVF centers in the US, Canada, or overseas. Approximately 60% of patients receiving treatment at our Center are long-distance patients from outside of the larger New York tri-state area. Over half of the patients reaching our Center have been previously advised that their only chance of pregnancy is third-party egg donation.
- Even women under age 40 at CHR, however, almost universally present with low functional reserve, defined as Abnormally high FSH and/or abnormally low AMH for their age.
As we always point out in presenting last year’s data, live births at this point cannot yet be determined. This is the reason why national registries (such as CDC and SART) report cycle outcomes with 2-3 years delay.
What we here report, on a preliminary basis, are clinical pregnancies, defined as pregnancies with fetal heart seen on ultrasound. They can be assumed close to a final birth rate since pregnancy losses after fetal heart has been detected are rare. Live birth rates, however, will always be somewhat lower than clinical pregnancy rates.
- Here reported pregnancy rates refer to pregnancies per embryo transfer. This is important to point out because IVF outcomes, in principle, should be reported by “intent to treat” which means with reference point cycle start. Because our center, however, serves such a highly adversely selected patient population, a disproportionate number of patients never reach embryo transfer because cycles are either canceled, no eggs are retrieved, or no embryos are available for transfer. Such patients are usually fully aware of these facts and therefore, request information about outcomes if at least one embryo is available for transfer. Patients are also advised that chances increase with increasing numbers of embryos available for transfer.
Below (The snapshot will be attached below on our website) you will find the 2019 preliminary SART Snapshot report, which is also available on the official SART website.
Considering our center’s patient population, above summarized cycle outcomes must be viewed as exceptional. They, indeed, would have to be considered as excellent even at an IVF center that serves an average patient population. To achieve such outcomes in what clearly represents the oldest but, likely, also the most adversely selected patient population at any IVF center in the U.S (and likely the world) must, indeed, be viewed as exceptional.
Norbert Gleicher, MD, leads CHR’s clinical and research efforts as Medical Director and Chief Scientist. A world-renowned specialist in reproductive endocrinology, Dr. Gleicher has published hundreds of peer-reviewed papers and lectured globally while keeping an active clinical career focused on ovarian aging, immunological issues and other difficult cases of infertility.
A comparison of clinic success rates may not be meaningful because patient medical characteristics, treatment approaches, and entry criteria for ART may vary from clinic to clinic.