Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (51)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by De Sutter, P.
Right arrow Articles by Dhont, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by De Sutter, P.
Right arrow Articles by Dhont, M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 17, No. 11, 2891-2896, November 2002
© 2002 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

A health-economic decision-analytic model comparing double with single embryo transfer in IVF/ICSI

Paul De Sutter1,3, Jan Gerris2 and Marc Dhont1

1 Infertility Centre, University Hospital Gent, and 2 Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Middelheim Hospital, Antwerpen, Belgium

BACKGROUND: Single embryo transfer (SET) is the sole strategy with which to reduce the incidence of twins following assisted reproductive technology (ART), but SET may increase the number of ART cycles needed per live-born child. Its cost-effectiveness compared with double embryo transfer (DET) is therefore unknown. METHODS: A decision-analytic model comparing SET with DET was developed. Estimates were obtained from literature, national pregnancy registers and local hospital records. A sensitivity analysis was performed, using pregnancy rates from four published studies. The outcome measure was the cost per child born, calculated from IVF procedure-related, pregnancy-related and neonatal care costs. Neonatal mortality and long-term morbidity costs were not taken into account. RESULTS: Independently of the pregnancy rates used, the SET cost per child born was in all instances the same as with DET, varying from C= 9 520 (SET) versus C= 9 511 (DET) to C= 12 254 (SET) versus C= 12 934 (DET). CONCLUSIONS: More ART cycles are required to obtain the same numbers of children born following SET compared with DET. Because SET allows the avoidance of twins and thus diminishes pregnancy-related and neonatal care costs, there is no difference in the cost per child born between SET and DET. The real advantage of SET is the avoidance of the very high long-term costs resulting from the increased morbidity of twins after birth.

Key words: cost-effectiveness/decision-analytic model/health-economics/IVF-ICSI/single embryo transfer

3 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: University Hospital, De Pintelaan 185, B-9000 Gent, Belgium. E-mail: paul.desutter{at}rug.ac.be


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
A. A.A. Fiddelers, C. D. Dirksen, J. C.M. Dumoulin, A. P.A. van Montfoort, J. A. Land, J. M. Janssen, J. L.H. Evers, and J. L. Severens
Cost-effectiveness of seven IVF strategies: results of a Markov decision-analytic model
Hum. Reprod., July 1, 2009; 24(7): 1648 - 1655.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
Z. Veleva, P. Karinen, C. Tomas, J. S. Tapanainen, and H. Martikainen
Elective single embryo transfer with cryopreservation improves the outcome and diminishes the costs of IVF/ICSI
Hum. Reprod., July 1, 2009; 24(7): 1632 - 1639.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
W. Ombelet, I. Cooke, S. Dyer, G. Serour, and P. Devroey
Infertility and the provision of infertility medical services in developing countries
Hum. Reprod. Update, November 1, 2008; 14(6): 605 - 621.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
S. Hoorens, F. Gallo, J. Cave, and J. Grant
Reply: Can assisted reproductive technologies help offset population ageing?
Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2008; 23(9): 2174 - 2175.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
The Obstetrician and GynaecologistHome page
I. Kosmas, J. Van der Elst, P. Devroey, and H. Tournaye
Elective single embryo transfer
Obstet Gynaecol (Lond), July 1, 2008; 10(3): 163 - 169.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
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]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
G. M. Chambers, M. G. Chapman, N. Grayson, M. Shanahan, and E. A. Sullivan
Babies born after ART treatment cost more than non-ART babies: a cost analysis of inpatient birth-admission costs of singleton and multiple gestation pregnancies
Hum. Reprod., December 1, 2007; 22(12): 3108 - 3115.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
A. Boeckxstaens, P. Devroey, J. Collins, and H. Tournaye
Getting pregnant after tubal sterilization: surgical reversal or IVF?
Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2007; 22(10): 2660 - 2664.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
S. Hoorens, F. Gallo, J.A.K. Cave, and J.C. Grant
Can assisted reproductive technologies help to offset population ageing? An assessment of the demographic and economic impact of ART in Denmark and UK
Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2007; 22(9): 2471 - 2475.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JAMAHome page
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]


Home page
Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
A.A.A. Fiddelers, J.L. Severens, C.D. Dirksen, J.C.M. Dumoulin, J.A. Land, and J.L.H. Evers
Economic evaluations of single- versus double-embryo transfer in IVF
Hum. Reprod. Update, January 1, 2007; 13(1): 5 - 13.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
P. De Sutter, I. Delbaere, J. Gerris, H. Verstraelen, S. Goetgeluk, J. Van der Elst, M. Temmerman, and M. Dhont
Birthweight of singletons after assisted reproduction is higher after single- than after double-embryo transfer
Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2006; 21(10): 2633 - 2637.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
A. A.A. Fiddelers, A. P.A. van Montfoort, C. D. Dirksen, J. C.M. Dumoulin, J. A. Land, G. A.J. Dunselman, J.M. Janssen, J. L. Severens, and J. L.H. Evers
Single versus double embryo transfer: cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomized clinical trial
Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2006; 21(8): 2090 - 2097.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
A. P.A. van Montfoort, A. A.A. Fiddelers, J.M. Janssen, J. G. Derhaag, C. D. Dirksen, G. A.J. Dunselman, J. A. Land, J. P.M. Geraedts, J. L.H. Evers, and J. C.M. Dumoulin
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., February 1, 2006; 21(2): 338 - 343.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
A. Pinborg
IVF/ICSI twin pregnancies: risks and prevention
Hum. Reprod. Update, November 1, 2005; 11(6): 575 - 593.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
J. M.R. Gerris
Single embryo transfer and IVF/ICSI outcome: a balanced appraisal
Hum. Reprod. Update, March 1, 2005; 11(2): 105 - 121.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
H.G.M. Lukassen, D. D.Braat, A. M.M. Wetzels, G. A. Zielhuis, E. M.M. Adang, E. Scheenjes, and J. A.M. Kremer
Two cycles with single embryo transfer versus one cycle with double embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial
Hum. Reprod., March 1, 2005; 20(3): 702 - 708.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
C. Bergh
Single embryo transfer: a mini-review
Hum. Reprod., February 1, 2005; 20(2): 323 - 327.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
W. Ombelet, P. De Sutter, J. Van der Elst, and G. Martens
Multiple gestation and infertility treatment: registration, reflection and reaction--the Belgian project
Hum. Reprod. Update, January 1, 2005; 11(1): 3 - 14.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
E.M.E.W. Heijnen, N.S. Macklon, and B.C.J.M. Fauser
What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction?: The next step to improving outcomes of IVF: consider the whole treatment
Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2004; 19(9): 1936 - 1938.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
S. Murray, A. Shetty, A. Rattray, V. Taylor, and S. Bhattacharya
A randomized comparison of alternative methods of information provision on the acceptability of elective single embryo transfer
Hum. Reprod., April 1, 2004; 19(4): 911 - 916.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
J. Gerris, P. De Sutter, D. De Neubourg, E. Van Royen, J. Vander Elst, K. Mangelschots, M. Vercruyssen, P. Kok, M. Elseviers, L. Annemans, et al.
A real-life prospective health economic study of elective single embryo transfer versus two-embryo transfer in first IVF/ICSI cycles
Hum. Reprod., April 1, 2004; 19(4): 917 - 923.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
J. K. Min, S. A. Breheny, V. MacLachlan, and D. L. Healy
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., January 1, 2004; 19(1): 3 - 7.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
P. Tummers, P. D. Sutter, and M. Dhont
Risk of spontaneous abortion in singleton and twin pregnancies after IVF/ICSI
Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2003; 18(8): 1720 - 1723.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
A. Tiitinen, L. Unkila-Kallio, M. Halttunen, and C. Hyden-Granskog
Impact of elective single embryo transfer on the twin pregnancy rate
Hum. Reprod., July 1, 2003; 18(7): 1449 - 1453.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
A. Pinborg, A. Loft, L. Schmidt, and A. N. Andersen
Morbidity in a Danish National cohort of 472 IVF/ICSI twins, 1132 non-IVF/ICSI twins and 634 IVF/ICSI singletons: health-related and social implications for the children and their families
Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2003; 18(6): 1234 - 1243.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
E. Neuber, P. Rinaudo, J.R. Trimarchi, and D. Sakkas
Sequential assessment of individually cultured human embryos as an indicator of subsequent good quality blastocyst development
Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2003; 18(6): 1307 - 1312.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
P. De Sutter, J. Gerris, and M. Dhont
A health-economic decision-analytic model comparing double with single embryo transfer in IVF/ICSI: a sensitivity analysis
Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2003; 18(6): 1361 - 1361.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
A. Pinborg, A. Loft, L. Schmidt, and A. N. Andersen
Attitudes of IVF/ICSI-twin mothers towards twins and single embryo transfer
Hum. Reprod., March 1, 2003; 18(3): 621 - 627.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.