Unfussy Uterus - interested how many of you feel this could be true for you

[sunshine76]

www.thaindian.com/newsportal/health/non-fussy-uteruses-blamed-for-miscarriages_100352001.html

This was in the New Scientist.

Since I read this last week I can't help thinking this really applies to me and my situation.

With my daughter it took us more than a year of well timed intercourse, temping, charting etc. But once I got pregnant it was successful - she is 3 in Sept.

We said lets try again in Oct 2009, got pregnant first time no-temping, only vaguely 'trying' - that ended in a miscarriage at 10 weeks.

We decided to leave it for a while, forward to Sept 2010, said let's try again, got pregnant first time again, only had sex once in the assumed fertile window, but no temping/charting etc. That ended in miscarriage too at 11 weeks.

After that we decided to try again quickly (no temping/charting just guessing at the fertile window) and got pregnant within two months, lost that one at 5 weeks.

So it seems to me that I am getting pregnant very very quickly but none are viable. I am 34 now and 31 when I had my daughter so not sure if age would be an issue.

Just interested who else has a story a bit like mine and how many women out there this non fussy uterus theory might apply to?

I don't believe there is anything they can do about it at the moment, but for me it provides a little bit of comfort that this could be the reason I am miscarrying, and I need to keeping trying and hoping that we get a sticky one soon.

Thanks for reading and please share your story if you would like.

[notforlong]

I have been pregnant 14 times, every time I got pregnant in the first month.

I have three DC's.

My consultant put this theory to me the other way around, saying that my uterus was fussy and would throw out any fetus with the smallest of problem.

I have a few friends with three DC's or more and they all have at least one with a minor disability. But they have never MC'd

[FrozenNorthPole]

I was discussing this with DH the other day. We have always conceived very quickly but had three miscarriages almost back to back. The cycle immediately after loss number three, I conceived DD1. DD2 was conceived from intercourse 5 days before ovulation, and this current pregnancy (which started with very low beta HCG levels, and I'm still terrified about losing) arose from intercourse on day 10 of my cycle with ovulation on day 16 or 17. We were avoiding. Interestingly, DH has had a couple of semen analyses and his count has always been very high but the morphology was largely abnormal.

Food for thought, as I wait to see when the current pregnancy will bite the dust

[Littlestone]

Thanks for posting this. I have had a real light bulb moment. I have had 3 miscarriages, each time I have got pregnant by having sex once that month!! Seems a bit of a coincidence. I am on the waiting list for recurrent miscarriage, but this may be useful.

[MrsTangerineMan]

I just came across this thread and it sounds like me too! I wondered if any of he oriinal posters were still around, have you had any successes?

I've been trying for three months and had two chemical pregnancies (this month and last). Starting to worry now !

[Twittwooo]

I know it's a while since anyone has posted on this thread, but I thought I'd update on my situation. I'm sure I also fall into this category, and it's very frustrating because it feels like such a waiting game. I have had two miscarriages in four months. Each time I became pregnant at the first attempt, and like most of you I wasn't charting or anything, we just estimated what we thought would be approximate ovulation time. I have just found out I am 4 weeks pregnant again, and this time we had sex both outside and within what I think was the ovulation window. In a way I was hoping I wasn't pregnant so that I didn't fall into this category, but because of this I'm sure I do. I'm interested to hear that some people have taken asprin - was this prescribed? I can't have any tests until after 3 miscarriages, so in a way I'm just waiting for that to happen, as awful as it sounds.

[LAF77]

Hi iggi I'm no scientist, but working through it in my logic, your womb's hormones/composition changes during the fertility window to allow the implantation of the egg. If the egg has been fertilised outside the window and starts its journey to the womb, it arrives too early or late for the chemical/hormonal changes to happen in sync with the appropriate development. But, hey, I'm no PhD. Everything I've learned in biology said that you shouldn't be pg at all if this happens.

The paper was published last year, so they could still be in experimental treatment phase, but they reference earlier research about aspirin and heparin from Raj Rai and Lesley Regan. I'm going to ask about what is happening with this development at my appt. I'd volunteer to be a candidate for any treatment. I'm 34 so relatively young in the stakes. If I could do anything to spare another person from going through a miscarriage, I'd accept that the pain of my miscarriages would have served a purpose to help others.

Bless you galwaygal I can't imagine suffering so many losses like you have. xx My third pg shouldn't have happened either. We had unprotected sex at the tail end of my period and there wasn't a logical reason for me to be pg. I was quite shocked to have a positive test, but I thought it was a miracle pg :-(

[igggi]

Have just been reading the link - very interesting (alarming) stuff. Was looking hopefully at the bottom of the article to see any suggestions of treatment! I don't quite understand the comments about trying just in the 48 hours around ovulation - the issue seems to be to do with implanting outside a certain time and I'm not sure how I can influence that?

[igggi]

Have just been reading the link - very interesting (alarming) stuff. Was looking hopefully at the bottom of the article to see any suggestions of treatment! I don't quite understand the comments about trying just in the 48 hours around ovulation - the issue seems to be to do with implanting outside a certain time and I'm not sure how I can influence that?

[galwaygal]

Forgot to say that on two occasions we only had intercourse once and a week before ovulation..... So theoretically just outside the fertile time. Yet became pregnant.

[galwaygal]

I certainly had a time where I was hyper-fertile or had an unfussy uterus.

It was exactly how Dr Rai described it at St Mary's.

He described it to me as being that a normal pregnancy takes a few months to occur, anything less than 3 months is unusual. Repeatedly concieving less than 3 months and especially when it is almost on the first try. He said the window for implantation is longer than normal. It should be just a few hours but in hyperfertility it can be days. He said the reverse is true for some women where the time for possible implantation is reduced causing infertility.

I have had 13 pregnancies.

1st pregnancy - took 4 months to concieve.
2nd pregnancy - took 4 months to concieve.

3rd pregnancy - took 8 months to concieve, but I was older now reaching 40. Miscarried.
4th pregnancy - was concieved without having a period after the previous m/c.

5th and subsequent pregnancies were all 1st trimester miscarriages all concieved within 1 month (except one that took 2 months). I spent the better part of 2 years pregnant and losing the pregnancies.

Something seemed to happen, whether it was age or what I don't know. But for nearly a year now I have not concived..... so my hyper-fertile status has now changed.

I have no idea why it happened or why it has now stopped but I know that something happened for a while. And to have Dr Rai explain it in the way he did certainly helped me cope better emotionally.

[LittleWhiteWolf]

Thanks LAF77, I'm grateful. Any advice is gladly received.
I hope your appt goes as well as possible.

[mumatron]

I think my consultant only requested one for my dp as he is an infertility specialist, rather than a rmc one. So it was standard procedure for him. Not all cons will ask for one.

Dp's results certainly tie in with this theory though. A low count and only 1% normal morphology means we should've had problems conceiving. We managed 5 pg in under 2 years. Longest time ttc was 2 months iirc.

[LAF77]

No mumatron they haven't looked at him at all yet. They are just looking at me at present.

whitewolf I've got an appt for recurrent miscarriage and if there is anything they say for people like us, I'll let you know here.

[mumatron]

laf has your dh had a sperm analysis done?

[LittleWhiteWolf]

I got pregnant right away when I was 23 and had my DD. Then I got pregnant again in December and later in February, again right away, but I lost both of lose at 6 and 11 weeks, although the latter was an mmc and the baby had stopped growing at 8 weeks-ish. I guess it makes sense that if ones uterus is allowing for embryoes to implant past the normal window or is accepting non-viable embyoes that it would stand to reason for a woman in this situation to be more at risk of misscarriage.

Very factual and I guess helpful to have a reason for the mcs, but what are you supposed to do with that information? How exactly do you train your uterus to be a bit more fussy? I think I need to look into this more because right now its just making me more down about the potential for losing more babies

[LAF77]

My cousin said that when she didn't use the OPKs she go pregnant and then went on to miscarry. When she had the successful pgs, they only TTC'd during the ovulation window and not before or after.

It's my thought exactly, you shouldn't be able to get pg outside of your fertility window. I've never used OPK's, just going for it when I think I'm ovulating, but perhaps I need to bring less spontaneity to the process. Science tells us that if the fertilised egg is not right, it should not implant and disintegrate and go out with your period.

Perhaps with those of us with "super-fertility" our bodies allow an egg to develop that wouldn't do so in other women, the "non-fussy uterus." Logically, it doesn't make sense to me, but there are many things that happen that defy logic.

Anyway for me, I've done the blood tests at St. Mary's now and I can wait to see what they say, if they can find anything wrong with me, but I will use the OPK's next time. If there is a chance I can do anything to prevent my 4th miscarriage, I will do it.

[Coconutfeet]

I use a Clearblue fertility monitor, which seems to do the job. I was meant to be having a month off last month after an ERPC which then had complications and dragged on for ages and ages, but was taken by surprise when I got a Peak really early, having dtd the night before. Sure enough - chemical pregnancy.

I'm not sure I understand what your cousin means - when she wasn't using OPKs she got pregnant but they didn't work out? Surely there's only a limited fertility window anyway? Or does she mean that they waited until they got a positive OPK and then went for it, rather than say every other day throughout the month? Sorry - I'm full of cold today so probably being a bit slow!

[LAF77]

Hi coconut I didn't discuss this with my doctor as I didn't actually see a doctor, just a sonographer and a nurse that took blood. I will discuss it with them when I am there in 3 weeks time.

My first cousin had 3 miscarriages and then her daughter. She had another miscarriage and then her second daughter. She told me that the only times that she was successful, she used the OPKs and only in that window and the pregnancies worked. I dismissed this as some sort of placebo or wishful thinking, but maybe she is right. When I have the go ahead, I will use the OPK and only TTC in this time frame. I asked her about how far the pgs got, but she didn't tell me.

For me, I want to be sure that there isn't another reason why I could be miscarrying.

Have you used the OPKs coconut in your past pgs?

[Coconutfeet]

This is fascinating LAF77. Thanks for posting. I think I might also be in the superfertile category as I've had 3 mcs and a chemical pregnancy since last September - i.e. a pregnancy every single cycle I've had since stopping BFing. I also got pregnant very quickly before I had ds, had a MC then got pregnant with ds on the following cycle.

Several friends have said, "well at least you're getting pregnant which is great at your age (43)". But it's just not helpful if I just keep losing each one.

Did you discuss this with your doc at the recurrent miscarriage clinic?

[LAF77]

Just had to add this link which was posted on another thread for those who are lurking.

superfertility


I'm pasting this part of the article which clarifies it for me. I am in the superfertility category as I conceive on the first attempt. It still doesn't make sense to me as I know people who fall pregnant without planning to and are able to carry their baby to term. It helps to start to shape why recurrent miscarriage might be happening to me.

Biologic fertility is measured using TTP [25]. Based on an average MFR of 20%, a simple mathematical model predicts that 74%, 93%, and 100% of normally fertile couples will conceive in 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively [15]. Along the same lines, moderate and severe subfertility are defined by MFR of 5% and 1%, respectively. On the other side of the spectrum is superfertility, characterized by a MFR of 60% or more. In this context, the term ?superfertility? refers to enhanced efficacy in achieving pregnancy but not increased life-births. Superfertile couples achieve 94% and 100% of pregnancies within 3 and 6 months, respectively [15]. It has been estimated that 79% of the population is fertile, 18% subfertile or infertile, and 3% superfertile [15], [26]. Our retrospective analysis of TTP revealed that 40% of RPL patients report very short time to conception for each pregnancy. Thus, the prevalence of ?superfertile? couples in this population appears to be considerably higher than expected. Arguably, a majority of patients did not, or at least not consistently, report very short TTPs but this is not unexpected as the likelihood of conception is dependent upon many additional variables, including timing and frequency of coitus and the presence of coexisting disorders, such as suboptimal sperm quality or ovulatory, tubal and uterine defects. Hence, additional well-controlled, prospective studies are warranted to test our assumption that the superfertile end of the fecundity spectrum is as much a pathological condition as subfertility.

[LAF77]

I did some research on the doctor and found this article.

More here

It seems like St. Mary's and Professor Quenby have been involved. I'll definitely ask more questions when I go on Wednesday.

[Coconutfeet]

And me. I'm 43 and, since giving up breastfeeding last August, I've been pregnant every single cycle that I've had resulting in three miscarriages and a chemical pregnancy. I've got one ds and had a miscarriage before him too. I'm currently undergoing testing at my local recurrent miscarriage clinic. I've got my next appointment in July and will mention it to her then. I'm very interested to know what other RMC doctors have said. Thanks for posting this op. I've been wondering whether there's anything in this for a while.

[pudding25]

I have had 2 miscarriages in the past 8 mths and both times got pregnant at the drop of a hat (I just turned 39). DD (aged 3) took a couple of months to conceive. It sounds a feasible theory. I have just been tested for blood clotting and I am fine. Not sure if I can face trying again for a while if at all.

[Chestnut99]

Asked my RMC consultant. he said initially that it sounded like nonsense but when when I tried to explain it better, he asked me to e-mail the article to him.

Have discovered today that my fertility levels are extremely low (am 40), which was a bit of a shock given that I have fallen pregnant three times since last summer ... So this could be the answer - duff embryos which never should have got going at all.

[hairylights]

Me too. 43, no dc, and four pregnancies in 12 months , 3 of which have been missed miscarriages, I'm now 5 + 4 and bricking it. All pregnancies achieved within first month of trying.