Determinants of the choice for single or double embryo transfer in twin prone couples

Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

Volumn 87, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 226-231

  Van Peperstraten, A M ^a   Kreuwel, I A M ^a   Hermens, R P M G ^a   Nelen, W L D M ^a   Van Dop, P A ^b   Grol, R P T M ^a   Kremer, J A M ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b CATHARINA HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Shared decision making; Single embryo transfer; Twin pregnancy

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; INTRACYTOPLASMIC SPERM INJECTION; PREGNANCY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCTION; RISK FACTOR; TWIN PREGNANCY; TWINS;

ADULT; BLASTOCYST; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DECISION MAKING; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; HUMANS; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NETHERLANDS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY, MULTIPLE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK FACTORS; TWINS;

EID: 38649139828     PISSN: 00016349     EISSN: 16000412     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00016340701855670     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Andersen AN, Goossens V, Gianaroli L, Felberbaum R, de MJ, Nygren KG. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2003. Results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod. 2007;22:1513-25.
2. Helmerhorst FM, Perquin DA, Donker D, Keirse MJ. Perinatal outcome of singletons and twins after assisted conception: a systematic review of controlled studies. BMJ. 2004;328:261.
3. Koudstaal J, Bruinse HW, Helmerhorst FM, Vermeiden JP, Willemsen WN, Visser GH. Obstetric outcome of twin pregnancies after in-vitro fertilization: a matched control study in four Dutch university hospitals. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:935-40.
4. Pinborg A. IVF/ICSI twin pregnancies: risks and prevention. Hum Reprod Update. 2005;11:575-93.
5. Rao A, Sairam S, Shehata H. Obstetric complications of twin pregnancies. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2004;18:557-76.
6. Lukassen HG, Schonbeck Y, Adang EM, Braat DD, Zielhuis GA, Kremer JA. Cost analysis of singleton versus twin pregnancies after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2004;81:1240-6.
7. Wolner-Hanssen P, Rydhstroem H. Cost-effectiveness analysis of in-vitro fertilization: estimated costs per successful pregnancy after transfer of one or two embryos. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:88-94.
8. Prevention of twin pregnancies after IVF/ICSI by single embryo transfer. ESHRE Campus Course Report. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:790-800.
9. Min JK, Breheny SA, MacLachlan V, Healy DL. What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? The singleton, term gestation, live birth rate per cycle initiated: the BESST endpoint for assisted reproduction. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:3-7.
10. Gerris J, De Neubourg D, Mangelschots K, Van Royen E, Van de Meersche M, Valkenburg M. Prevention of twin pregnancy after in-vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection based on strict embryo criteria: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:2581-7.
11. Gleicher N, Barad D. The relative myth of elective single embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:1337-44.
12. Lukassen HG, Braat DD, Wetzels AM, Zielhuis GA, Adang EM, Scheenjes E, et al. Two cycles with single embryo transfer versus one cycle with double embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:702-8.
13. Martikainen H, Tiitinen A, Tomas C, Tapanainen J, Orava M, Tuomivaara L, et al. One versus two embryo transfer after IVF and ICSI: a randomized study. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:1900-3.
14. Neubourg DD, Mangelschots K, Van Royen E, Vercruyssen M, Ryckaert G, Valkenburg M, et al. Impact of patients' choice for single embryo transfer of a top quality embryo versus double embryo transfer in the first IVF/ICSI cycle. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:2621-5.
15. Thurin A, Hausken J, Hillensjo T, Jablonowska B, Pinborg A, Strandell A, et al. Elective single-embryo transfer versus double-embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2392-402.
16. Veleva Z, Vilska S, Hyden-Granskog C, Tiitinen A, Tapanainen JS, Martikainen H. Elective single embryo transfer in women aged 36-39 years. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:2098-102.
17. Pandian Z, Templeton A, Serour G, Bhattacharya S. Number of embryos for transfer after IVF and ICSI: a Cochrane review. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:2681-7.
18. van Montfoort AP, Fiddelers AA, Janssen JM, Derhaag JG, Dirksen CD, Dunselman GA, et al. In unselected patients, elective single embryo transfer prevents all multiples, but results in significantly lower pregnancy rates compared with double embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:338-43.
19. Gerris J, De Neubourg D, Mangelschots K, Van Royen E, Vercruyssen M, Barudy-Vasquez J, et al. Elective single day 3 embryo transfer halves the twinning rate without decrease in the ongoing pregnancy rate of an IVF/ICSI programme. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:2626-31.
20. van Wely M, Twisk M, Mol BW, van de Veen F. Is twin pregnancy necessarily an adverse outcome of assisted reproductive technologies? Hum Reprod. 2006;21:2736-8.
21. Grol RWMEM. Improving patient care, 1st edn. 2004; Butterworth-Heinemann.
22. Davis LB, Lathi RB, Westphal LM, Milki AA. Elective single blastocyst transfer in women older than 35. Fertil Steril. 2007 (in press).
23. Steer CV, Mills CL, Tan SL, Campbell S, Edwards RG. The cumulative embryo score: a predictive embryo scoring technique to select the optimal number of embryos to transfer in an in-vitro fertilization and embryo transfer programme. Hum Reprod. 1992;7:117-9.
24. Arora NK, McHorney CA. Patient preferences for medical decision making: who really wants to participate? Med Care. 2000;38:335-41.
25. Maly RC, Umezawa Y, Leake B, Silliman RA. Determinants of participation in treatment decision-making by older breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2004;85:201-9.
26. Pruchno RA, Lemay EP Jr, Feild L, Levinsky NG. Predictors of patient treatment preferences and spouse substituted judgments: the case of dialysis continuation. Med Decis Making. 2006;26:112-21.
27. Blennborn M, Nilsson S, Hillervik C, Hellberg D. The couple's decision-making in IVF: one or two embryos at transfer? Hum Reprod. 2005;20:1292-7.
28. Child TJ, Henderson AM, Tan SL. The desire for multiple pregnancy in male and female infertility patients. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:558-61.
29. Pinborg A, Loft A, Schmidt L, Andersen AN. Attitudes of IVF/ICSI-twin mothers towards twins and single embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:621-7.
30. Ryan GL, Zhang SH, Dokras A, Syrop CH, Van Voorhis BJ. The desire of infertile patients for multiple births. Fertil Steril. 2004;81:500-4.
31. Steures P, Berkhout JC, Hompes PG, van der Steeg JW, Bossuyt PM, van d V, Habbema JD, et al. Patients' preferences in deciding between intrauterine insemination and expectant management. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:752-5.
32. Statistics Netherlands, Kerncijfers Postcodegebieden; 2004. http:/www.cbs.nl/nl-NL/menu/themas/nederland-regionaal/nederland-regionaal/ cijfers/incidenteel/maatwerk/kerncijferspostcodegebieden-2004.htm.
33. Templeton A, Morris JK, Parslow W. Factors that affect outcome of in-vitro fertilisation treatment. Lancet. 1996;348:1402-6.
34. Newton CR, McBride J, Feyles V, Tekpetey F, Power S. Factors affecting patients' attitudes toward single- and multiple-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2007;87:269-78.
35. Grobman WA, Milad MP, Stout J, Klock SC. Patient perceptions of multiple gestations: an assessment of knowledge and risk aversion. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185:920-4.
36. Kalra SK, Milad MP, Klock SC, Grobman WA. Infertility patients and their partners: differences in the desire for twin gestations. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102:152-5.
37. Pistorius EN, Adang EM, Stalmeier PF, Braat DD, Kremer JA. Prospective patient and physician preferences for stimulation or no stimulation in IVF. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2006;9:209-16.