4.7 Article

Cost-effectiveness comparison between pituitary down-regulation with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist short regimen on alternate days and an antagonist protocol for assisted fertilization treatments

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 99, Issue 6, Pages 1615-1622

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.01.095

Keywords

Controlled ovarian stimulation; GnRHa; GnRHant ICSI; pituitary down-regulation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To compare cost-effectiveness between pituitary down-regulation with a GnRH agonist (GnRHa) short regimen on alternate days and GnRH antagonist (GnRHant) multidose protocol on in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) outcome. Design: Prospective, randomized. Setting: A private center. Patient(s): Patients were randomized into GnRHa (n = 48) and GnRHant (n = 48) groups. Intervention(s): GnRHa stimulation protocol: administration of triptorelin on alternate days starting on the first day of the cycle, recombinant FSH (rFSH), and recombinant hCG (rhCG) microdose. GnRHant protocol: administration of a daily dose of rFSH, cetrorelix, and rhCG microdose. Main Outcome Measure(s): ICSI outcomes and treatment costs. Result(s): A significantly lower number of patients underwent embryo transfer in the GnRHa group. Clinical pregnancy rate was significantly lower and miscarriage rate was significantly higher in the GnRHa group. It was observed a significant lower cost per cycle in the GnRHa group compared with the GnRHant group ($5,327.80 +/- 387.30 vs. $5,900.40 +/- 472.50). However, mean cost per pregnancy in the GnRHa was higher than in the GnRHant group ($19,671.80 +/- 1,430.00 vs. $11,328.70 +/- 907.20). Conclusion(s): Although the short controlled ovarian stimulation protocol with GnRHa on alternate days, rFSH, and rhCG microdose may lower the cost of an individual IVF cycle, it requires more cycles to achieve pregnancy. (C) 2013 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available