Blog

What Did The Lancet Study Find?

A study published in The Lancet last month evaluated the effectiveness of several common IVF “add-ons”, including acupuncture, on fertility outcomes. The study did not completely pan acupuncture, as it did some other IVF add-ons, but it rated the efficacy of acupuncture as “unclear”, due to the low level of certainty of the studies it examined.

I love an unfavorable study, actually. Why, you might ask? Because it gives me an opportunity to educate people on what actually DOES make acupuncture helpful for IVF and what we should actually be looking for in a quality study. So, jump on the Little Miss Know-it-All train with me, and let’s unpack this latest article together.

Research Limitations

First things first: this study is what is called a Meta-Analysis. That means the authors examine data from multiple studies and pull their conclusions from a larger pool. In theory, this should give us more confidence in the results if several sources are all saying one thing. In this particular meta-analysis, study dates ranged from 1996-2024. That’s an enormous range. While we like a big range, the fact is that the bulk of the studies included in this meta-analysis date from around 2006-2008. In terms of advancement in the field of IVF, that was a long time ago. In fact, most of the studies included in this analysis were about the effect of acupuncture on fresh embryo transfers, which almost never happen anymore. It is still done, but it’s no longer the standard of care.

‘Sham Acupuncture’

Next, and this is a very important point to consider, several of the studies in this analysis are comparing a treatment group – that is to say, the group getting acupuncture – to a control group which is receiving what is called ‘Sham Acupuncture’, where a person is needled at a place on the body that is NOT an acupuncture point, or a fake needle that does not puncture the skin is used. Sham Acupuncture has long since been proven to be an ineffective control because it is not inert- it has physiological effects on the body.

IVF Has Changed – The Research Will Too

Another big issue with this meta-analysis relates back to how IVF is practiced today versus 15-20 years ago. Many people today elect to genetically test their embryos to minimize adverse events. The widespread adoption of genetic testing has created a landscape where these are the majority of the embryos transferred now. None of the studies selected in the Lancet meta-analysis studied acupuncture’s effect on frozen transfers of genetically-tested embryos, which is most of what I’m seeing in the clinic when I work with people getting ready for a frozen transfer (FET). It’s not good or bad, but it’s another example of a study which doesn’t represent how IVF acupuncture is practiced in the real world in 2026.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, ALL of the studies used in the meta-analysis only looked at acupuncture treatments done around the time of embryo transfer, sometimes with one additional treatment added in. This simply isn’t how we practice when helping our patients get ready for IVF. If you dig into published research where people were receiving multiple acupuncture treatments, you will find a trend towards BETTER RESULTS WITH MORE TREATMENT. By better results, I mean more pregnancies, more live births, less adverse events. More good stuff, less bad stuff.

What This Means for Patients Today

I’m excited to see IVF acupuncture research evolve over the next decade to reflect both how we practice in our clinic and how the fertility doctors practice in theirs. Last month, we launched our IVF Care Plans. These evidence-based offerings bundle together a research-backed number of treatments with well-studied supplements so you can focus on caring for yourself during your cycle instead of playing Dr. Google. Interested in learning more? Schedule a free 15-minute consult and let’s talk about how we can help you meet your goals.

Molly Kubinski L.Ac., FABORM