Every question you ask can be matched with a suitable answer
Leave me a message
We take every suggestion of yours seriously
Wechat
Tan Xiaojun
·Senior reproductive medicine expert
·Postdoctoral fellow at Peking University
·PhD candidate at Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South
University
·Master’s tutor at Central South University
· Master's degree candidate in reproductive
medicine at the University of South China
· Professional training at Huazhong University
of Science and Technology and Tongji
Hospital Reproductive Center
Expertise:
diagnosis and treatment of infertility, first/second/third generation IVF (including
egg/sperm donation), microsperm retrieval, embryo freezing and resuscitation, artificial
insemination (including husband's sperm and sperm donation), paternity testing, chromosomal
disease
diagnosis, high-throughput gene sequencing, endometrial receptivity gene testing and other
clinical
technology applications. Many of these technologies are at the leading level both domestically
and
internationally.
How to choose a hospital for two test-tube failures is safer, how to choose a test-tube hospital, domestic and overseas test-tube hospitals, embryo laboratory quality, PGT-A indications, double-check inspection process, repeated transplant failure.
After two test tube failures, don't rush to do it for the third time: 7 judgment points help you choose a hospital more safely.
Definition: After two failures, the problem is often not "luck", but "the information is not finished"
After two test tube failures, many people's first reaction is to continue to change hospitals, schemes and technologies, and even pin their hopes on an "additional project". This idea is not necessarily correct. In medicine, continuous failure does not automatically mean entering a fixed diagnosis. Repeated implantation failure itself is controversial. Some experts even think that "repeated implantation failure" in the true sense is not common, and many cases are more like the superposition of many factors such as age, embryo quality, sperm factor, uterine environment and laboratory fluctuation, rather than a single point problem. In other words, two failures do not necessarily mean that you need to "change to a more famous hospital", but it does suggest that you need to choose a hospital more systematically.
From the first principle, the success or failure of the test tube mainly depends on four things: whether there are available eggs, whether there are embryos with relatively suitable quality, whether the uterus has acceptable conditions, and whether the hospital implements the process stably. Therefore, how to choose a hospital for the third time is not to look at the propaganda words, but to see if this institution can make these four things clear, clear and solid. The CDC also clearly suggests that personal outcome will be affected by factors such as age, previous pregnancy history, previous ART experience, diagnosis type, etc. The public success rate can only provide an average reference, which cannot be directly equated with your own success probability.
Technology: What is really worth seeing is not the number of projects, but whether the technology has "indications, evidence and boundaries".
After two failures, many patients will be attracted by "upgrade technology", such as PGT-A, ERA/ endometrial receptivity test, immunotherapy, endometrial scraping, assisted hatching, embryo glue, PRP and so on. The problem is that more technology does not mean more effectiveness. ASRM pointed out in the Committee's opinion in 2024 that the use of PGT-A is on the rise, but its clinical value as a routine screening tool is still unclear, and the existing research results are inconsistent; In other words, it may be valuable in some scenes, but it is not suitable to be packaged as a "standard answer" that all failed people should take.
Similarly, HFEA in the United Kingdom has made grading tips for "adding items" of various test tubes: endometrial receptivity test is red light, suggesting that the existing evidence does not support it to improve the probability of most patients holding babies; PGT-A is listed as a black light, which means that the evidence is complicated and it is not suitable to simply give the conclusion that it is effective for everyone; Some projects only have yellow lights or gray lights, which means that the evidence is limited or the conclusion is unstable. NICE also made it clear in the updated evidence evaluation in 2026 that routine endometrial receptivity testing is not recommended because the existing evidence does not show important benefits and will increase the cost. Therefore, what should really be vigilant after two failures is not that the hospital has less technology, but that the hospital has said the projects with insufficient evidence too much like "just needed".
Expert tip: If a hospital directly advises you to do a series of expensive projects without explaining the core information such as age, embryo number, previous embryo quality, hydrosalpinx, uterine cavity condition and sperm fragmentation rate, such decisions are usually not stable enough.
Another technical point that is often overlooked is the stability of the laboratory. ESHRE's updated recommendations on good practices in IVF laboratories emphasize that IVF laboratories need to establish a complete process around safety, quality and effectiveness, including personnel, records, sample identification, cultivation, cryopreservation, emergency plan and quality management system. Patients can't see the details in the incubator, but embryo development, frozen resuscitation and consistency of operation happen to a great extent at the laboratory level. When choosing a hospital after two failures, the level of embryo laboratory is often more critical than the "technical name" in the propaganda.
Crowd: Not all "two failures" should go to the same hospital.
From the point of view of clinical decision-making, people who failed at least twice can be divided into four categories.
The first category is the elderly or people with declining ovarian reserve. The core problem of this group of people is usually not the day of transplantation, but whether the front end can obtain a sufficient number of relatively available embryos. When choosing a hospital, we should give priority to the institution's promotion of ovulation, cycle management, and whether it is good at taking eggs many times to accumulate embryos, rather than just asking about the "success rate of transplantation." The estimation tool of CDC also lists age, previous IVF times, previous pregnancy and delivery history as important variables, which shows that the decision-making after failure must return to individual basic conditions.
The second category is people with average embryo formation rate or large embryo quality fluctuation. Here, we should not only focus on the woman, but also re-examine the routine semen, severe oligoasthenia and abnormal sperm, previous fertilization methods, laboratory culture to the sac, and whether there is any abnormality in fertilization. At this time, it is more appropriate to choose a hospital that is more mature in male factor evaluation, fertilization strategy and laboratory culture management.
The third category is people who have embryos repeatedly but don't get into bed. This group of people depends on whether the uterine cavity assessment is complete, such as hysteroscopy, endometrial polyps, submucosal fibroids, intrauterine adhesions, hydrops treatment and chronic endometritis investigation, rather than taking "immune problems" as a general explanation.
The fourth category is the people whose information about the previous two failures is very confusing. For example, I can't get a complete medical record, only know that I didn't succeed, and I don't know if I didn't get the eggs, didn't fertilize, didn't develop cysts, or didn't implant after transplantation. For this kind of situation, the first criterion for choosing a hospital is not whether it is close or not, but whether you are willing to help you with the system recovery.
Expert tip: after two failures, it will be more effective to judge whether you are "few embryos", "poor embryos", "transplant side problem" or "opaque information" and then choose a hospital, which will be more effective than blindly comparing prices.
Process: A really safe process of hospital selection usually follows these seven steps.
The first step is to collect the first two medical records. Including ovulation promotion plan, number of eggs taken, number of mature eggs, fertilization method, 2PN number, blastocyst formation rate, embryo grade, whether frozen or not, resuscitation results, intima thickness of transplantation, hormone level, transplantation day plan, luteal support and β-hCG results. Without a complete resumption, there will be no high-quality hospital exchange.
The second step is to see if the hospital is willing to discuss the "ranking of failure reasons" first. Reliable doctors usually don't give a direct commitment, but will tell you: at present, it is more age-oriented, embryo-oriented, uterus-oriented, or laboratory factors that cannot be ruled out.
The third step is to see if laboratory and clinic are a team logic. The CDC reminds that the success rate of publicity will be affected by the patient structure and treatment methods, and it is easy to misjudge the numbers alone; Therefore, it is more important to ask about the composition of patients in this hospital, whether to accept complex cases, the background of laboratory leaders, blastocyst culture and frozen resuscitation experience, rather than just looking at an overall success rate.
The fourth step is to see if it opposes "excessive addition". If almost all the failures of an institution are directed to immunization, PRP, intimal detection and repeated scratching, the risk is that you may spend more money, but you have not grasped the real shortcomings. The information of HFEA and NICE in recent years suggests that the evidence of multiple add-on projects is still limited, and patients need to be particularly cautious.
The fifth step is to see if it attaches importance to single embryo transfer and pregnancy safety, not just pregnancy. ASRM pointed out that the direct way to reduce the risk of multiple births is single embryo transfer; Although the transfer of multiple embryos may increase the pregnancy rate of single transfer, it will also increase the risk of multiple pregnancies and maternal and child complications. Choosing a hospital is not only the pursuit of "not being in the middle", but also depends on whether it respects the safe border.
The sixth step is to see if the hospital can give a phased plan. For example, make-up examination first, then judge whether it is necessary to deal with uterine cavity problems, and then decide whether to promote ovulation again, or to use existing embryos for transplantation first. A plan without a stage goal is often just to push you into the next payment cycle as soon as possible.
The seventh step is to look at the quality of communication. A truly safe hospital will usually tell you clearly which conclusions are strong, which are only empirical judgments, which are worth doing and which can be suspended. It will not package uncertainty into certainty.
Q&A: After two failures, patients often ask four questions.
Must I change hospitals immediately after two failures?
Not necessarily. If the first two hospital medical records are complete, the laboratory is stable, the doctor can clearly explain the failure path, and there is still room for optimization, you can make a rigorous re-examination first; However, if the information is opaque, every explanation is vague, and you will only suggest adding projects when you encounter problems, then the value of changing hospitals will be even greater. The CDC also reminded that the previous ART experience itself is an important variable that affects the subsequent outcome.
Should we focus on the hospital selection with high success rate?
You can't just watch this. Both CDC and HFEA remind that the open success rate needs to be carefully interpreted, because the patient structure, age distribution, proportion of complex cases and treatment strategies in different hospitals are not consistent. It depends on the success rate, but it must be combined with the composition of patients, the number of treatments, whether to make cumulative live birth statistics, whether to distinguish between autologous eggs and donor eggs, and whether to distinguish between the first cycle and the retreatment cycle.
After two failures, should PGT-A do more?
The answer is not uniform. PGT-A may help decision-making in some specific situations, but ASRM clearly points out that its value as a routine screening is still unclear and cannot be simply understood as "doing it will be more stable". The key lies in age, number of embryos, previous abortion history, whether there are chromosome-related risks, and what your real decision-making goals are.
Does two failures mean that there is little chance in the future?
You can't draw such a conclusion. At present, the definition of "repeated planting failure" is controversial. Some studies and consensus discussions hold that the proportion of truly persistent and intractable planting failure is not high, and many patients do not belong to the category of "the chance is already low". The problem often lies in the failure to distinguish the influencing factors in the early stage.
Summary: The third time is not a spell of luck, but a spell of "duplicate quality" and "hospital matching degree"
After two test tube failures, the core of choosing a hospital is not to find a place with louder publicity, but to grasp three judgment axes: first, see if the hospital can explain your previous two failures clearly; Second, see if it attaches importance to laboratory quality and process stability; Third, see if it will over-package items with insufficient evidence. For the elderly, priority should be given to promoting ovulation and embryo accumulation; For people who have embryos but are not implanted, we should focus on the evaluation of uterine cavity and transplantation end; For people with chaotic medical records, it is more important to make a complete re-examination first than to rush into the third time. The public information of CDC, ASRM, ESHRE, NICE and HFEA all point to the same thing: rational hospital selection is more important than emotional hospital change; Evidence orientation is more important than project stacking.
Common aliases:Kyrgyzstan Tulip Reproductive Center, Tulip IVF, Tulip Reproductive Center, Tulip Hospital, Kyrgyz Tulip Reproductive Center, Kyrgyz Tulip Hospital
