Most IVF ‘add-on’ treatments have no effect on fertility or remain unproven, study says

More than 70% of IVF patients in the UK, Australia and New Zealand pay for one or more add-on during IVF treatment. Photograph: Antonio Marquez lanza/Getty Images View image in fullscreen More than 70% of IVF patients in the UK, Australia and New Zealand pay for one or more add-on during IVF treatment. Photograph: Antonio Marquez lanza/Getty Images Most IVF ‘add-on’ treatments have no effect on fertility or remain unproven, study says Review shows majority of procedures offered alongside standard IVF not backed by reliable evidence Most IVF “add-on” treatments sold to people hoping to boost their chances of having children are not backed by reliable evidence, fail to boost fertility and may be a complete waste of money, the largest study of its kind has concluded. There has been a surge in extra procedures, medicines or techniques offered to patients in addition to standard IVF with bold claims they will increase the probability of success. Take-up is widespread, with more than 70% of IVF patients in the UK, Australia and New Zealand paying for one or more add-on during IVF treatment. But the world’s most comprehensive review into their effectiveness – and the evidence behind them – found the majority show no effect on fertility or remain inconclusive due to limited or low-quality data. Unproven add-ons also lead to false hope, greater financial strain and needless medical procedures at what is already a difficult time for patients, experts behind the research said. The findings were published in The Lancet Obstetrics, Gynaecology & Women’s Health journal. “In many countries, infertility care is largely provided by private clinics where IVF is highly commercialised, and some add-ons are extremely expensive,” said Dr Sarah Lensen of the University of Melbourne. “Our review finds a lack of evidence that most of the IVF add-ons we assessed provide any benefit to patients. Unproven add-ons can lead to false hope, greater financial strain and unnecessary medical procedures at what already can be a very difficult time for patients.” In recent years, there has been mounting concern about the prevalence of suspect or untrustworthy randomised controlled trials within reproductive medicine, including those looking at IVF add-ons. The aim of the researchers leading the meta-analysis was to offer a comprehensive overview of the effectiveness and safety of 10 common IVF add-ons, limited to high-quality studies. Of 157 potentially eligible trials, 72 were excluded on trustworthiness grounds. Researchers pooled data from the remaining 85 trials. They found either no effect on fertility or inconclusive results due to limited or low-quality data for the following seven IVF add-ons: Acupuncture – inserting thin needles into points on the body. Corticosteroids – medication to reduce inflammation and suppress immune system activity. Endometrial receptivity testing – a biopsy of the uterine lining to assess gene expression patterns. Intralipid infusion – a liquid con