Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on November 26, 2004
Human Reproduction 2005 20(1):4-8; doi:10.1093/humrep/deh610
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Would legislation imposing single embryo transfer be a feasible way to reduce the rate of multiple pregnancies after IVF treatment?
1 IVF Clinic CURA, Malmö, Sweden
2 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: IVF Clinic CURA, Box 237, S-200 74 Malmö, Sweden. or Email: pia.saldeen{at}curakliniken.se
Due to increased maternal and fetal risks, there is a strong opinion in favor of single embryo transfer (SET) in order to reduce the high multiple pregnancy rate after IVF. We have evaluated the effects on pregnancy rate and twinning of recent Swedish legislation on SET. The study comprised three embryo transfer (ET) periods: period I, autumn 2001–spring 2002 (n=609), with a double embryo transfer (DET) policy; period II, autumn 2002 (n=320), a transitional period; and period III, January–September 2003 (n=433), with a SET policy. During the three periods, the SET rates were 25.1, 55.5 and 72.7%, respectively (Kruskal–Wallis test P<0.0001). There was no difference in clinical pregnancy rates (33.3, 32.8 and 37.4%, respectively) (P=0.4), but the twinning rate was significantly lower in the third period (6.2 versus 22.6% in period I and 16.3% in period II) (P<0.005). After introducing a SET policy, the expected decline of twinning was met at an unchanged clinical pregnancy rate. Thus, the SET legislation had no negative consequences for the couples. On the contrary, the lower rate of twinning is expected to reduce the severity and rate of pregnancy complications after IVF. Whether legislation or voluntary SET is the most feasible way to proceed, in order to reduce the multiple pregnancy rates after IVF, can be debated.
Key words: elective single embryo transfer/IVF/pregnancy rate/twin pregnancy rate
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. Polinder, E.M.E.W. Heijnen, N.S. Macklon, J.D.F. Habbema, B.J.C.M. Fauser, and M.J.C. Eijkemans Cost-effectiveness of a mild compared with a standard strategy for IVF: a randomized comparison using cumulative term live birth as the primary endpoint Hum. Reprod., February 1, 2008; 23(2): 316 - 323. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P.O. Karlstrom and C. Bergh Reducing the number of embryos transferred in Sweden-impact on delivery and multiple birth rates Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2007; 22(8): 2202 - 2207. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Donoso, W. Verpoest, E.G. Papanikolaou, I. Liebaers, H.M. Fatemi, K. Sermon, C. Staessen, J. Van der Elst, and P. Devroey Single embryo transfer in preimplantation genetic diagnosis cycles for women <36 years does not reduce delivery rate Hum. Reprod., April 1, 2007; 22(4): 1021 - 1025. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. J. Stillman A 47-Year-Old Woman With Fertility Problems Who Desires a Multiple Pregnancy JAMA, February 28, 2007; 297(8): 858 - 867. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Legge, R. Fitzgerald, and N. Frank A retrospective study of New Zealand case law involving assisted reproduction technology and the social recognition of 'new' family Hum. Reprod., January 1, 2007; 22(1): 17 - 25. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Z. Veleva, S. Vilska, C. Hyden-Granskog, A. Tiitinen, J. S. Tapanainen, and H. Martikainen Elective single embryo transfer in women aged 36-39 years Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2006; 21(8): 2098 - 2102. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|