Should IVF be used as first-line treatment or as a last resort? A debate presented at the 2013 Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society meeting

Huang LN, Lina Huang, Lina N Huang, Tan J, Justin Tan, Jason Hitkari, Hitkari J, Michael H. Dahan
Reproductive BioMedicine Online · 2014 · vol. 30(2) , pp. 128–136 · doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.10.004 · PMID:25498596 · W2152394572
review OA: bronze CC0 ⤵ 1 in-corpus citation
🔓 Open OA copy View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-06-09 ⓘ

This debate explored whether IVF should be utilized as a primary or secondary fertility treatment option.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Infertility outcomes can be influenced by many factors. Although a number of treatments are offered, deciding which one to use first is a controversial topic. Although IVF may have superior efficacy in achieving a live birth with a reasonable safety profile, the availability of cheaper and less invasive treatments preclude its absolute use. For this reason, certain patient groups with 'good-prognosis' infertility are traditionally treated with less invasive treatments first. 'Good-prognosis' infertility may include unexplained infertility, mild male factor infertility, stage I or II endometriosis, unilateral tubal blockage and diminished ovarian reserve. Here, evidence behind the use of IVF as a first-line treatment is compared with its use as a last-resort option in women with 'good-prognosis' infertility.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

endometriosis

MeSH descriptors

Fertilization in Vitro Infertility Infertility, Male Ovulation Induction Canada Endometriosis Endometriosis Fallopian Tubes Fallopian Tubes Female Fertilization in Vitro Fertilization in Vitro Fertilization in Vitro Humans Infertility Infertility, Female Infertility, Female Infertility, Male Male Ovarian Reserve

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (72)

Cited by (1)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-08-25T06:10:03.373225+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-04T00:00:01.174412+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-05-13T22:18:10.358439+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK