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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Human reproduction (Oxford) 2009-12, Vol.24 (12), p.3073-3081 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
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 & 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</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&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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 |