How to demonstrate that eSET does not compromise the likelihood of having a baby?

BACKGROUND In several randomized studies, elective single embryo transfer (eSET) has proven its effectiveness in reducing twin pregnancy rates while obtaining acceptable overall pregnancy rates. However, there is no outcome measurement consensus to evaluate the effectiveness of eSET versus double-em...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Human reproduction (Oxford) 2009-12, Vol.24 (12), p.3073-3081
Hauptverfasser: Bechoua, S., Astruc, K., Thouvenot, S., Girod, S., Chiron, A., Jimenez, C., Sagot, P.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 3081
container_issue 12
container_start_page 3073
container_title Human reproduction (Oxford)
container_volume 24
creator Bechoua, S.
Astruc, K.
Thouvenot, S.
Girod, S.
Chiron, A.
Jimenez, C.
Sagot, P.
description BACKGROUND In several randomized studies, elective single embryo transfer (eSET) has proven its effectiveness in reducing twin pregnancy rates while obtaining acceptable overall pregnancy rates. However, there is no outcome measurement consensus to evaluate the effectiveness of eSET versus double-embryo transfer (DET). METHODS This study evaluated whether or not adopting an eSET strategy instead of a DET strategy lowers the probability of having at least one live-born infant in good prognosis couples. Seven hundred and twenty-six couples were divided into two groups. The retrospective arm of the study was undertaken on the first group of couples (n = 483, DET group) and the prospective arm performed on the second group of couples (n = 243, SET group). In these specific populations, the probability of a woman having at least one live-born infant and the probability that one embryo utilized leads to a child were the main outcome measures. RESULTS The probability of a woman having at least one live-born infant was 60.5% in the DET group compared with 60.8% in the SET group. The probability of a live-born child per embryo utilized was not significantly different between the SET and the DET groups, 18.9% and 17.6%, respectively. In addition, the cumulative multiple live birth rate was significantly lower in the SET compared with the DET group. CONCLUSIONS In this observational study, using appropriate cryopreservation techniques, the chance of delivering a live baby, per utilized embryo, in an elective SET strategy is as good as that for DET.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/humrep/dep321
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_734145864</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/humrep/dep321</oup_id><sourcerecordid>734145864</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-96a5956f14fea397879468006ccdbd45092102291e852d3e6ef75701038ba8ad3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0N1r1jAUBvAgins3vdyt5EbcTV2-01yJ7OsVBjI2YXgT0uZ0b13b1CSd7r9fR8u89CoH8uOchwehQ0o-U2L48W7qI4zHHkbO6Cu0oUKRgnFJXqMNYaosKFV0D-2n9IuQeSzVW7RHjZaMUL5BV9vwB-eAPfRhSDm6DDjvXMZwfXaDfYCEh5BxHfoxhr5Nz7-Au_YeunYXgsehwTv30A532OHKVY9f3qE3jesSvF_fA_Tj_OzmZFtcfr_4dvL1sqi54bkwykkjVUNFA44bXWojVEmIqmtfeSGJYZQwZiiUknkOChotNaGEl5UrnecH6NOydw72e4KU7Ryvhq5zA4QpWc0FFbJUYpbFIusYUorQ2DG2vYuPlhL7XKJdSrRLibP_sG6eqh78P722NoOPK3Cpdl0T3VC36cUxRpWmhs3uaHFhGv97c83Ypgx_X7CL91ZprqXd3v60p6dCiFsireBPz8iXYA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>734145864</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>How to demonstrate that eSET does not compromise the likelihood of having a baby?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Bechoua, S. ; Astruc, K. ; Thouvenot, S. ; Girod, S. ; Chiron, A. ; Jimenez, C. ; Sagot, P.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bechoua, S. ; Astruc, K. ; Thouvenot, S. ; Girod, S. ; Chiron, A. ; Jimenez, C. ; Sagot, P.</creatorcontrib><description>BACKGROUND In several randomized studies, elective single embryo transfer (eSET) has proven its effectiveness in reducing twin pregnancy rates while obtaining acceptable overall pregnancy rates. However, there is no outcome measurement consensus to evaluate the effectiveness of eSET versus double-embryo transfer (DET). METHODS This study evaluated whether or not adopting an eSET strategy instead of a DET strategy lowers the probability of having at least one live-born infant in good prognosis couples. Seven hundred and twenty-six couples were divided into two groups. The retrospective arm of the study was undertaken on the first group of couples (n = 483, DET group) and the prospective arm performed on the second group of couples (n = 243, SET group). In these specific populations, the probability of a woman having at least one live-born infant and the probability that one embryo utilized leads to a child were the main outcome measures. RESULTS The probability of a woman having at least one live-born infant was 60.5% in the DET group compared with 60.8% in the SET group. The probability of a live-born child per embryo utilized was not significantly different between the SET and the DET groups, 18.9% and 17.6%, respectively. In addition, the cumulative multiple live birth rate was significantly lower in the SET compared with the DET group. CONCLUSIONS In this observational study, using appropriate cryopreservation techniques, the chance of delivering a live baby, per utilized embryo, in an elective SET strategy is as good as that for DET.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0268-1161</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1460-2350</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dep321</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19752013</identifier><identifier>CODEN: HUREEE</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Adult ; Biological and medical sciences ; Clinical Protocols ; cryopreservation ; elective single embryo transfer ; Embryo Transfer - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Female ; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics ; Humans ; Infertility - therapy ; IVF/ICSI outcome ; Medical sciences ; Multiple Birth Offspring - statistics &amp; numerical data ; multiple pregnancy ; Outcome Assessment (Health Care) ; Pregnancy ; Pregnancy Rate ; Single Embryo Transfer - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Statistics as Topic</subject><ispartof>Human reproduction (Oxford), 2009-12, Vol.24 (12), p.3073-3081</ispartof><rights>The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org 2009</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-96a5956f14fea397879468006ccdbd45092102291e852d3e6ef75701038ba8ad3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-96a5956f14fea397879468006ccdbd45092102291e852d3e6ef75701038ba8ad3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,1585,27929,27930</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=22167192$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19752013$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bechoua, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Astruc, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thouvenot, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Girod, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chiron, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jimenez, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sagot, P.</creatorcontrib><title>How to demonstrate that eSET does not compromise the likelihood of having a baby?</title><title>Human reproduction (Oxford)</title><addtitle>Hum Reprod</addtitle><description>BACKGROUND In several randomized studies, elective single embryo transfer (eSET) has proven its effectiveness in reducing twin pregnancy rates while obtaining acceptable overall pregnancy rates. However, there is no outcome measurement consensus to evaluate the effectiveness of eSET versus double-embryo transfer (DET). METHODS This study evaluated whether or not adopting an eSET strategy instead of a DET strategy lowers the probability of having at least one live-born infant in good prognosis couples. Seven hundred and twenty-six couples were divided into two groups. The retrospective arm of the study was undertaken on the first group of couples (n = 483, DET group) and the prospective arm performed on the second group of couples (n = 243, SET group). In these specific populations, the probability of a woman having at least one live-born infant and the probability that one embryo utilized leads to a child were the main outcome measures. RESULTS The probability of a woman having at least one live-born infant was 60.5% in the DET group compared with 60.8% in the SET group. The probability of a live-born child per embryo utilized was not significantly different between the SET and the DET groups, 18.9% and 17.6%, respectively. In addition, the cumulative multiple live birth rate was significantly lower in the SET compared with the DET group. CONCLUSIONS In this observational study, using appropriate cryopreservation techniques, the chance of delivering a live baby, per utilized embryo, in an elective SET strategy is as good as that for DET.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Clinical Protocols</subject><subject>cryopreservation</subject><subject>elective single embryo transfer</subject><subject>Embryo Transfer - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infertility - therapy</subject><subject>IVF/ICSI outcome</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Multiple Birth Offspring - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>multiple pregnancy</subject><subject>Outcome Assessment (Health Care)</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Pregnancy Rate</subject><subject>Single Embryo Transfer - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Statistics as Topic</subject><issn>0268-1161</issn><issn>1460-2350</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqF0N1r1jAUBvAgins3vdyt5EbcTV2-01yJ7OsVBjI2YXgT0uZ0b13b1CSd7r9fR8u89CoH8uOchwehQ0o-U2L48W7qI4zHHkbO6Cu0oUKRgnFJXqMNYaosKFV0D-2n9IuQeSzVW7RHjZaMUL5BV9vwB-eAPfRhSDm6DDjvXMZwfXaDfYCEh5BxHfoxhr5Nz7-Au_YeunYXgsehwTv30A532OHKVY9f3qE3jesSvF_fA_Tj_OzmZFtcfr_4dvL1sqi54bkwykkjVUNFA44bXWojVEmIqmtfeSGJYZQwZiiUknkOChotNaGEl5UrnecH6NOydw72e4KU7Ryvhq5zA4QpWc0FFbJUYpbFIusYUorQ2DG2vYuPlhL7XKJdSrRLibP_sG6eqh78P722NoOPK3Cpdl0T3VC36cUxRpWmhs3uaHFhGv97c83Ypgx_X7CL91ZprqXd3v60p6dCiFsireBPz8iXYA</recordid><startdate>20091201</startdate><enddate>20091201</enddate><creator>Bechoua, S.</creator><creator>Astruc, K.</creator><creator>Thouvenot, S.</creator><creator>Girod, S.</creator><creator>Chiron, A.</creator><creator>Jimenez, C.</creator><creator>Sagot, P.</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20091201</creationdate><title>How to demonstrate that eSET does not compromise the likelihood of having a baby?</title><author>Bechoua, S. ; Astruc, K. ; Thouvenot, S. ; Girod, S. ; Chiron, A. ; Jimenez, C. ; Sagot, P.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-96a5956f14fea397879468006ccdbd45092102291e852d3e6ef75701038ba8ad3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Clinical Protocols</topic><topic>cryopreservation</topic><topic>elective single embryo transfer</topic><topic>Embryo Transfer - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infertility - therapy</topic><topic>IVF/ICSI outcome</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Multiple Birth Offspring - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>multiple pregnancy</topic><topic>Outcome Assessment (Health Care)</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Pregnancy Rate</topic><topic>Single Embryo Transfer - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Statistics as Topic</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bechoua, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Astruc, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thouvenot, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Girod, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chiron, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jimenez, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sagot, P.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Human reproduction (Oxford)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bechoua, S.</au><au>Astruc, K.</au><au>Thouvenot, S.</au><au>Girod, S.</au><au>Chiron, A.</au><au>Jimenez, C.</au><au>Sagot, P.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>How to demonstrate that eSET does not compromise the likelihood of having a baby?</atitle><jtitle>Human reproduction (Oxford)</jtitle><addtitle>Hum Reprod</addtitle><date>2009-12-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>3073</spage><epage>3081</epage><pages>3073-3081</pages><issn>0268-1161</issn><eissn>1460-2350</eissn><coden>HUREEE</coden><abstract>BACKGROUND In several randomized studies, elective single embryo transfer (eSET) has proven its effectiveness in reducing twin pregnancy rates while obtaining acceptable overall pregnancy rates. However, there is no outcome measurement consensus to evaluate the effectiveness of eSET versus double-embryo transfer (DET). METHODS This study evaluated whether or not adopting an eSET strategy instead of a DET strategy lowers the probability of having at least one live-born infant in good prognosis couples. Seven hundred and twenty-six couples were divided into two groups. The retrospective arm of the study was undertaken on the first group of couples (n = 483, DET group) and the prospective arm performed on the second group of couples (n = 243, SET group). In these specific populations, the probability of a woman having at least one live-born infant and the probability that one embryo utilized leads to a child were the main outcome measures. RESULTS The probability of a woman having at least one live-born infant was 60.5% in the DET group compared with 60.8% in the SET group. The probability of a live-born child per embryo utilized was not significantly different between the SET and the DET groups, 18.9% and 17.6%, respectively. In addition, the cumulative multiple live birth rate was significantly lower in the SET compared with the DET group. CONCLUSIONS In this observational study, using appropriate cryopreservation techniques, the chance of delivering a live baby, per utilized embryo, in an elective SET strategy is as good as that for DET.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>19752013</pmid><doi>10.1093/humrep/dep321</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0268-1161
ispartof Human reproduction (Oxford), 2009-12, Vol.24 (12), p.3073-3081
issn 0268-1161
1460-2350
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_734145864
source MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Adult
Biological and medical sciences
Clinical Protocols
cryopreservation
elective single embryo transfer
Embryo Transfer - statistics & numerical data
Female
Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics
Humans
Infertility - therapy
IVF/ICSI outcome
Medical sciences
Multiple Birth Offspring - statistics & numerical data
multiple pregnancy
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Rate
Single Embryo Transfer - statistics & numerical data
Statistics as Topic
title How to demonstrate that eSET does not compromise the likelihood of having a baby?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T05%3A33%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How%20to%20demonstrate%20that%20eSET%20does%20not%20compromise%20the%20likelihood%20of%20having%20a%20baby?&rft.jtitle=Human%20reproduction%20(Oxford)&rft.au=Bechoua,%20S.&rft.date=2009-12-01&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=3073&rft.epage=3081&rft.pages=3073-3081&rft.issn=0268-1161&rft.eissn=1460-2350&rft.coden=HUREEE&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/humrep/dep321&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E734145864%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=734145864&rft_id=info:pmid/19752013&rft_oup_id=10.1093/humrep/dep321&rfr_iscdi=true