Cost-effectiveness of single versus double embryo transfer in IVF in relation to female age

European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology

Volumn 214, Issue , 2017, Pages 25-30

  van Loendersloot, Laura L ^a   Moolenaar, Lobke M ^a,b,c   van wely, Madelon ^a   Repping, Sjoerd ^a   Bossuyt, Patrick M ^a   Hompes, Peter G A ^b   van der Veen, Fulco ^a   Mol, Ben Willem J ^a,d  

^a ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Costeffectiveness; Double embryo transfer; Female age; IVF; Singele embryo transfer

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DECISION TREE; DOUBLE EMBRYO TRANSFER; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; FREEZE THAWING; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; INTENTION TO TREAT ANALYSIS; LIVE BIRTH; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PREGNANCY RATE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SINGLE EMBRYO TRANSFER; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; IN VITRO FERTILIZATION; MATERNAL AGE; PREGNANCY; TWIN PREGNANCY;

ADULT; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION TREES; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMANS; MATERNAL AGE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY, TWIN;

EID: 85018361311     PISSN: 03012115     EISSN: 18727654     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.04.031     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. [1] Schieve, L.A., Peterson, H.B., Meikle, S.F., Jeng, G., Danel, I., Burnett, N.M., et al. Live-birth rates and multiple-birth risk using in vitro fertilization. JAMA 19 (1999), 1832–1838.
2. [2] European IVF-Monitoring Consortium (EIM), European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2011: results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod 31 (2016), 233–248.
3. [3] ESHRE, Multiple gestation pregnancy. The ESHRE capri workshop group. Hum Reprod 8 (2000), 1856–1864.
4. [4] Bergh, C., Single embryo transfer: a mini-review. Hum Reprod 2 (2005), 323–327.
5. [5] Gerris, J., De Neubourg, D., Mangelschots, K., Van Royen, E., Van de Meerssche, 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 10 (1999), 2581–2587.
6. [6] Pandian, Z., Bhattacharya, S., Ozturk, O., Serour, G., Bhattacharya, S., Number of embryos for transfer following in-vitro fertilisation or intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2, 2013, CD003416.
7. [7] McLernon, D.J., et al. Clinical effectiveness of elective single versus double embryo transfer: meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized trials. BMJ, 341, 2010, c6945.
8. [8] Sonnenberg, F.A., Beck, J.R., Markov models in medical decision making: a practical guide. Med Decis Making 4 (1993), 322–338.
9. [9] Drummond, M.F., Jefferson, T.O., Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. BMJ 7052 (1996), 275–283.
10. [10] 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 23 (2004), 2392–2402.
11. [11] CBS, Statistics Netherlands Consumer price index. 2010 Available at: http://statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?DM=SLNL&PA=81122NED.
12. [12] Gerris, J.M., Single embryo transfer and IVF/ICSI outcome: a balanced appraisal. Hum Reprod Update 2 (2005), 105–121.
13. [13] ESHRE, Good Clinical Treatment in Assisted Reproduction – An ESHRE position paper. 2008 Available at: https://www.eshre.eu/Guidelines-and-Legal/ESHRE-Position-Papers.aspx.
14. [14] Little, S.E., Ratcliffe, J., Caughey, A.B., Cost of transferring one through five embryos per in vitro fertilization cycle from various payor perspectives. Obstet Gynecol 3:Pt 1 (2006), 593–601.
15. [15] Dixon, S., Faghih, N.F., Ledger, W.L., Lenton, E.A., Duenas, A., Sutcliffe, P., et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of different embryo transfer strategies in England. BJOG 6 (2008), 758–766.
16. [16] Fiddelers, A.A.A., Dirksen, C.D., Dumoulin, J.C.M., van Montfoort, A.P.A., Land, J.A., Janssen, J.M., et al. Cost-effectiveness of secen IVF strategies: results of a Markov decision-analytic model. Hum Repd 24 (2009), 1648–1655.
17. [17] Fiddelers, A.A.A., van Montfoort, A.P.A., Dirksen, C.D., Dumoulin, J.C.M., Land, J.A., Dunselman, G.A.J., et al. Single versus double embryo transfer: cost-effectiveness alongside a randomized clinical trial. Hum Reprod 21 (2006), 2090–2097.
18. [18] Braakhekke, M., Kamphuis, E.I., Dancet, E.A., Mol, F., van der Veen, F., Mol, B.W., Ongoing pregnancy qualifies best as the primary outcome measure of choice in trials in reproductive medicine: an opinion paper. Fertil Steril 101:May (2014), 1203–1204.
19. [19] Clarke, J.F., van Rumste, M.M.E., Farquhar, C.M., Johnson, N.P., Mol, B.W.J., Herbison, P., Measuring outcomes in fertility trials: can we rely on clinical pregnancy rates?. Fertil Steril 94 (2010), 1647–1651.
20. [20] van Loendersloot, L.L., van Wely, M., Limpens, J., Bossuyt, P.M., Repping, S., van der Veen, F., Predictive factors in in vitro fertilization (IVF): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 6 (2010), 577–589.
21. [21] Lawlor, D.A., Nelson, S.M., Effect of age on decisions about the numbers of embryos to transfer in assisted conception: a prospective study. Lancet 9815 (2012), 521–527.