Tuesday, February 09, 2010

Same difference?

We had our consult at Bigger Clinic.

Basically, they agreed that we're getting the right treatment at Local Clinic. At least, they said they would stick to basically the same protocol. They see no compelling reason to transfer to them.

Would anything be different if we did? Yes, but just a few small things.

They use a different freezing technique, which may or may not work better for us.
Interesting, but there's no telling if we would even have something to freeze next time. I'll be glad if we have something to transfer (knock on wood).

A new abbreviation caught my attention though. I.M.S.I. One I hadn't heard of either (yes! another addition for my IF card collection). Basically it's ICSI with a bonus: a spermatozoa beauty pageant.

No, really. They magnify the candidates under a powerful microscope, about 20(?) times higher resolution than with regular ICSI and then select the best looking ones. Supposedly, the good-looking ones also have less problems in the DNA load they carry (less breaks, missing pieces ...), resulting in better cycle outcomes overall.

A quick search on the net revealed that the technique holds promise (in one study at least) but that there is not enough data to conclude whether it is worth it, considering the cost.

So this is now the question for us to answer:  do we transfer to Bigger Clinic just to give I.M.S.I. a shot, at the price of lots of hassle added to cycling. Or do we stay at Local Clinic, which is convenient and familiar.

6 Comments:

At 10 February, 2010 03:08, Blogger namaste said...

Such a tough call. It would've been so much easier if the 2nd clinic had had some brilliant insights or answers for you. IF sucks.

 
At 10 February, 2010 14:10, Anonymous Kath said...

Dear Lut, that's a tough one. I don't know what I would do, to tell you the truth. Sometimes it does help to do something different -- rather than ask oneself later whether things would have turned out better with that extra little push. But if there's much more hassle involved, and what with your busy schedule already, it might be better to keep things as simple as humanly possible. So you see, I'm going both ways. Thanks for nuttin', Kath.

 
At 10 February, 2010 22:34, Blogger Bea said...

As you thought, then.

As for the switch, I guess for me it would depend how many goes I had left, and whether that was a firm number or not. If I was coming into my definitely-last try, I would probably make the switch. If I had as many goes as I wanted and felt like I had a few more cycles in me yet, I would probably just go again with the usual clinic.

Bea

 
At 10 February, 2010 23:25, Blogger Thalia said...

Don't think there is a right answer here. What does your gut say?

 
At 12 February, 2010 01:30, Blogger Yana Safran said...

I met you via your comment on my creme de la creme posting :)

The whole IF process is one heck of a tough call. What with the increased chances of birth defects with every new technology thrown in (we did IVF + ICSI) and playing the probability game all the time, I'd say either way is fine since how do you really KNOW? I kinda agree with Bea that if it's the last try, go all out and try something new. Good luck!

 
At 12 February, 2010 01:42, Blogger Hopeful Mother said...

I don't have any great answers for you, but I did read up on IMSI after your post, and found it quite compelling. Is it worth the extra hassle - well, I just don't know.

I don't think either choice is wrong. Tough call.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home