Skip Navigation



Hum. Reprod. Advance Access published online on February 2, 2005
Human Reproduction, doi:10.1093/humrep/deh655
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/3/588    most recent
deh655v1
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 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 arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Inge, G. B.
Right arrow Articles by Elder, K. T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Inge, G. B.
Right arrow Articles by Elder, K. T.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction © European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology 2005; all rights reserved
Received October 19, 2004
Accepted October 26, 2004

Opinion

Oocyte number per live birth in IVF: were Steptoe and Edwards less wasteful?

George B. Inge 1*, Peter R. Brinsden 2, and Kay T. Elder 2

1 The Center for Reproductive Medicine at Mobile Infirmary Medical Center, 3 Mobile Infirmary Circle, Suite 213, Mobile, AL 36607, USA
2 Bourn Hall Clinic, Bourn, Cambridge CB3 7TR, UK

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
George B. Inge, E-mail: GIngel10216{at}aol.com


  Abstract

As part of a learning exercise to assess the efficiency of oocyte utilization after controlled ovarian stimulation, we compared historical data from the publications of Steptoe and Edwards describing their early experiences in Oldham and at Bourn Hall with retrospective data from IVF and ICSI cycles carried out at Bourn Hall Clinic during the year 2000. For the purpose of analysing the more recent data, patients were subdivided into groups by age (≤37 years and ≥38 years) and by oocyte yield (low, intermediate and high). In patients less than 38 years of age, live birth rates were equivalent in each group, irrespective of the number of oocytes retrieved. Patients who yielded low numbers of oocytes (1-5) utilized an average of 9.6 oocytes per live birth, compared with 25.1 and 51.5 in those who yielded intermediate (6-16) and high (16+) numbers of oocytes. The comparison with historical data suggests that the ‘efficiency’ of oocyte utilization has not improved significantly since the early 1980s, despite 25 years' experience of controlled ovarian stimulation for IVF treatment.

Keywords: IVF; live birth rates; oocyte numbers; ovarian stimulation.
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
B. C.J.M. Fauser
Preimplantation genetic screening: the end of an affair?
Hum. Reprod., December 1, 2008; 23(12): 2622 - 2625.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
E. B. Baart, E. Martini, M. J. Eijkemans, D. Van Opstal, N. G.M. Beckers, A. Verhoeff, N. S. Macklon, and B. C.J.M. Fauser
Milder ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization reduces aneuploidy in the human preimplantation embryo: a randomized controlled trial
Hum. Reprod., April 1, 2007; 22(4): 980 - 988.
[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.