How We Explain IVF Success Rates
Reviewing IVF outcome statistics is a reasonable step when you are comparing clinics. A published average still doesn’t define your individual prognosis. Age, ovarian reserve, sperm findings, uterine factors, and previous cycle history all change the picture.
At our clinic, led by Assoc. Prof. Dr. Senai Aksoy, we report laboratory and clinical endpoints with the definitions stated below so that numbers can be read in context rather than as a promise.
Table of Contents
- Our Success Rates in Full Transparency
- How Success Rates Are Compared
- The Impact of Age on Your Pregnancy Chances
- Our Medical and Technological Approach
Our Success Rates in Full Transparency
Short Answer:
Our published rate is 68.9% β-hCG positivity per frozen embryo transfer, based on our own 2025 outcomes — a single, clearly defined endpoint reported the same way for every patient.
The data we present reflects our β-hCG (biochemical) pregnancy positivity rates per embryo transfer, based on our 2025 outcomes across approximately 2,000 patients. A positive β-hCG is an early blood-test marker of pregnancy, measured before — and therefore higher than — a clinical pregnancy later confirmed by ultrasound. We report this endpoint transparently so that figures can be compared on a like-for-like basis.
The chart below compares the outcomes following a Fresh Embryo Transfer and a Frozen Embryo Transfer (FET). Improvements in freezing techniques (vitrification) now allow us to observe excellent implantation rates during deferred cycles.
How Success Rates Are Compared — and Why They Often Aren’t Comparable
Short Answer:
A “success rate” only means something once you know exactly what’s being measured and against which denominator. Figures using different endpoints — per aspiration, per transfer, per started cycle — are not directly comparable, even when the percentages look similar.
A published “success rate” only tells you something once you know what’s actually being measured. Clinics and countries don’t all report the same endpoint: some use β-hCG positivity per embryo transfer, others clinical pregnancy per aspiration, others cumulative live birth per started cycle. A freeze-all protocol shifts the denominator further still, since the transfer is deferred and only euploid embryos may be replaced. Compare two such figures without knowing which definition sits behind each one, and the comparison stops meaning much.
The scale of that spread is visible in the ESHRE European IVF-Monitoring (EIM) Consortium’s 2020 data, published in 2025 from 1,440 clinics across 41 European countries: clinical pregnancy rate per aspiration was 22.1% for IVF (rising to 26.4% once freeze-all cycles were excluded), while FET clinical pregnancy rate per thaw was 34.9% (ESHRE’s European IVF-Monitoring Consortium, 2025). That gap comes down to which denominator was used — not which clinic did better work.
It’s why we report our own outcomes as β-hCG positivity per embryo transfer: one clearly defined endpoint, so the number in front of you can be read in context rather than as a ranking claim.
“Don’t compare a clinic’s quoted rate with ours before you’re sure both are measuring the same thing. It’s a bit like judging which of two cars is better by looking only at the speedometer.”
What that number is actually counting matters: a positive pregnancy test, a gestational sac on ultrasound, or a live birth? At what age, and per embryo transfer or per patient who started treatment? Does it include frozen transfers, PGT-tested embryos, or only patients who already had a favourable prognosis? A percentage on its own, without that context, tells you more about how it was presented than about what actually happened.
What concerns me most is when a rate is quoted as one polished figure without stating the conditions behind it — a clinical pregnancy rate calculated in a selected group of younger patients who reached blastocyst transfer can end up being described to an older patient as if it were her own chance, while patients whose treatment was cancelled or whose pregnancy ended in miscarriage may never have entered that calculation. So instead of a single number, what I tell a patient is this: what matters for you isn’t our highest percentage — it’s your own likelihood of going home with a healthy baby per treatment started, once we account for your age, ovarian reserve, embryo count, and prior treatments.
The Impact of Age on Your Pregnancy Chances
Short Answer:
Maternal age is the single most decisive factor in IVF outcomes: ovarian reserve and egg quality decline over time, so younger patients generally see higher per-cycle success rates than older patients.
Ovarian reserve and egg quality naturally decline over time. Maternal age therefore remains the most decisive prognostic factor in assisted reproduction.
Under 35
Egg quality is often still relatively strong in this band, which is why per-transfer rates tend to be higher on average.
35-37
Rates usually remain favourable. Stimulation may be adjusted to the ovarian response observed that cycle.
38-39
Lab conditions and transfer timing matter more here — culture and timing are set to the file, not a fixed recipe.
40-41
PGT-A may be discussed when chromosomal risk rises with age; it can inform embryo selection but does not guarantee implantation.
42 and over
Hormone levels and antral follicle count guide the protocol. Expectations are reviewed honestly before starting.
Our Medical and Technological Approach
Short Answer:
We combine time-lapse embryo monitoring and preimplantation genetic testing (PGT-A) within an individualised protocol, rather than a single standard approach, to address each couple’s specific cause of infertility.
Couples who turn to us—often after unsuccessful attempts at other centers—are looking for a deeper understanding of their situation. This is why we prioritize highly precise reproductive medicine over standard protocols.
Advanced Embryology Laboratory
The quality of the culture environment is vital for embryo development. Using incubators equipped with a Time-Lapse system (Embryoscope) allows us to monitor cellular division in real time. This minimizes handling outside the incubator and provides a highly stable environment for the embryos.
Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGT-A)
As maternal age advances, the risk of embryonic chromosomal abnormalities increases. By performing a genetic test on the embryo prior to transfer (PGT-A), we ensure its euploidy, reducing the risk of miscarriage and enhancing the likelihood of implantation.
“There is no universal protocol in reproductive medicine. Our role is to decipher the unique circumstances of each couple to implement a clinical strategy that specifically addresses their underlying cause of infertility.”
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
It’s natural to have plenty of questions before starting IVF treatment. Here are answers to some of the ones we hear most often.
How many IVF attempts are generally required?
A significant portion of our patients, approximately 60%, achieve a pregnancy within their first two cycles. When a cycle is unsuccessful, the clinical data gathered enables us to refine the treatment for the subsequent attempt.
Are recurrent implantation failures (RIF) inevitable?
No. Unexplained implantation failure requires investigating underlying causes that may not have been previously detected, such as immunological factors, vaginal dysbiosis, abnormalities in the uterine cavity (polyps, synechiae), or male factors (sperm DNA fragmentation).
Why are success rates with frozen embryos sometimes higher?
A deferred frozen embryo transfer (FET) offers the advantage of separating the ovarian stimulation phase (and its dramatic hormonal shifts) from the implantation phase. This allows the endometrium to be prepared under optimal conditions, closer to a natural cycle.
Can I directly compare your success rate with another clinic's published rate?
Not reliably, unless both figures use the same denominator and endpoint — for example, both reporting live birth per embryo transfer within the same age group. We report β-hCG positivity per embryo transfer specifically so our figures can be read in context rather than as a ranking claim.
Obtaining a Personalized Evaluation
Don’t rely solely on statistical averages.
We invite you to contact our international team. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Senai Aksoy will carefully review your medical history, hormonal panels (AMH), and ultrasound scans (AFC) to provide you with an honest and constructive medical opinion.
Medical Disclaimer and Legal Notice
Last medical review date: July 18, 2026.
The information contained in this article, along with all statistical data, has been compiled and verified by Assoc. Prof. Dr. Senai Aksoy, specialist in gynecology, obstetrics, and reproductive medicine. Please be advised that in vitro fertilization is subject to significant individual biological variations. The data provided is for consultative and indicative purposes only. It does not replace the medical evaluation conducted during a consultation specific to your case. © Assoc. Prof. Dr. Senai Aksoy - All rights reserved.
Add as a Preferred Source on Google
You can add draksoyivf.com as one of your preferred health information sources on Google.
