Review of 85 Trials Finds 7 IVF Add-Ons Fail to Boost Fertility
Updated
Updated · The Guardian · Jun 23
Review of 85 Trials Finds 7 IVF Add-Ons Fail to Boost Fertility
3 articles · Updated · The Guardian · Jun 23
Summary
A Lancet review of 85 high-quality trials found seven of 10 common IVF add-ons showed no fertility benefit or remained inconclusive, despite being widely sold alongside standard treatment.
More than 70% of IVF patients in the UK, Australia and New Zealand pay for at least one add-on, the study said, even as researchers warned they can create false hope, extra costs and unnecessary procedures.
The analysis screened 157 potentially eligible trials and excluded 72 over trustworthiness concerns, underscoring broader worries about weak or suspect evidence in reproductive medicine.
Only three add-ons showed weak possible benefit: EmbryoGlue and endometrial scratching may raise pregnancy or live-birth chances, while PICSI may reduce miscarriage risk.
Researchers said commercialization by private fertility clinics and overstated claims on clinic websites and social media have helped normalize unproven treatments.
Could AI offer the IVF success boost that unproven add-on treatments have long promised?
With clinics selling expensive 'false hope,' how can IVF patients avoid being scammed?
Why are regulators struggling to stop the multi-million dollar sale of unproven fertility treatments?
Most IVF Add-Ons Offer No Proven Benefit: Insights from 85 Clinical Trials and the Push for Transparency
Overview
A major review published in June 2026 examined 85 reliable clinical trials and found that, although millions of IVF procedures are performed worldwide each year, only a small number lead to live births. The review established a clear scientific consensus: most commonly used IVF add-ons do not have proven benefits. Robust evidence supporting these extra treatments is largely missing, and there is no strong scientific basis to suggest they improve pregnancy or live birth rates. Only a few add-ons showed weak evidence of possible benefit, highlighting the need for patients and clinicians to approach these options with caution.