Hum. Reprod. Advance Access first published online on June 11, 2007
This version published online on June 18, 2007
Human Reproduction, doi:10.1093/humrep/dem120
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reducing the number of embryos transferred in Sweden-impact on delivery and multiple birth rates
1 Reproductive centre, Institution of Women's and Children's health, Academic Hospital, 751 85 Uppsala, Sweden 2 Reproductive medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Institution of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, SE 413 45, Göteborg, Sweden
3 Correspondence address. Tel: +46186112838; Fax: +4618551241; E-mail: per.olof.karlstrom{at}akademiska.se
BACKGROUND: Reduction of the number of embryos transferred has been introduced to decrease the multiple birth rates (MBRs) after IVF and the associated risks for the children. The aim of this report is to present the effect of two steps in reduction of the number of embryos transferred, when applied in the majority of the patients, on national data for delivery and MBR after IVF in Sweden.
METHODS: This observational study is based on annual reports from all IVF clinics in Sweden to the National Board of Health and Welfare for the time period 1991–2004.
RESULTS: The main finding is that despite a successive reduction in the number of embryos transferred, delivery rates were maintained at around 26% while MBR decreased dramatically, from about 35% to around 5%. The same pattern was noticed, independent of age, for all women below 40. In comparison with the USA, lower delivery and MBR were noted for Sweden whereas a higher ‘birth per embryo transferred’ was found.
CONCLUSIONS: Single embryo transfer (SET) results in satisfactory delivery rates and a dramatic decrease in the MBRs, also when applied on a broad scale. The experience from Sweden ought to encourage other countries to introduce SET more widely.
Key words: single embryo transfer/multiple birth/IVF/delivery rate
The figure legends for figures 1 and 2 were incorrect in the original version. They are correct in this version.
Submitted on February 11, 2007; resubmitted on April 2, 2007; accepted on April 16, 2007.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  A.M. van Peperstraten, R.P.M.G. Hermens, W.L.D.M. Nelen, P.F.M. Stalmeier, G.J. Scheffer, R.P.T.M. Grol, and J.A.M. Kremer Perceived barriers to elective single embryo transfer among IVF professionals: a national survey Hum. Reprod., September 4, 2008; (2008) den327v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A.M. van Peperstraten, W.L.D.M. Nelen, R.P.M.G Hermens, L. Jansen, E. Scheenjes, D.D.M. Braat, R.P.T.M. Grol, and J.A.M. Kremer Why don't we perform elective single embryo transfer? A qualitative study among IVF patients and professionals Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2008; 23(9): 2036 - 2042. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. De Sutter, J. Gerris, and M. Dhont Assisted reproductive technologies: how to minimize the risks and complications in developing countries? ESHRE Monogr, July 1, 2008; 2008(1): 73 - 76. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|