Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2013 Nov;100(5):1381-8.
doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.06.035. Epub 2013 Jul 19.

Management of the first in vitro fertilization cycle for unexplained infertility: a cost-effectiveness analysis of split in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection

Wendy S Vitek  1 , Omar Galárraga, Peter C Klatsky, Jared C Robins, Sandra A Carson, Andrew S Blazar
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Management of the first in vitro fertilization cycle for unexplained infertility: a cost-effectiveness analysis of split in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection

Wendy S Vitek et al. Fertil Steril. 2013 Nov.

Abstract

Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of split IVF-intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) for the treatment of couples with unexplained infertility.

Design: Adaptive decision model.

Setting: Academic infertility clinic.

Patient(s): A total of 154 couples undergoing a split IVF-ICSI cycle and a computer-simulated cohort of women <35 years old with unexplained infertility undergoing IVF.

Intervention(s): Modeling insemination method in the first IVF cycle as all IVF, split IVF-ICSI, or all ICSI, and adapting treatment based on fertilization outcomes.

Main outcome measure(s): Live birth rate, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

Result(s): In a single cycle, all IVF is preferred as the ICER of split IVF-ICSI or all ICSI ($58,766) does not justify the increased live birth rate (3%). If two cycles are needed, split IVF/ICSI is preferred as the increased cumulative live birth rate (3.3%) is gained at an ICER of $29,666.

Conclusion(s): In a single cycle, all IVF was preferred as the increased live birth rate with split IVF-ICSI and all ICSI was not justified by the increased cost per live birth. If two IVF cycles are needed, however, split IVF/ICSI becomes the preferred approach, as a result of the higher cumulative live birth rate compared with all IVF and the lesser cost per live birth compared with all ICSI.

Keywords: Cost-effectiveness; split IVF-ICSI; unexplained infertility.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 2
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Practice Committee of the American Society of Reprodutive Medicine. Effectiveness and treatment for unexplained infertility. Fertil Steril. 2006;86:S111–4. - PubMed
    1. Isaksson R, Tiitinen A. Present concept of unexplained infertility. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2004;18:278–90. - PubMed
    1. Aboulghar MA, Mansour RT, Serour GI, Sattar MA, Amin YM. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection and conventional in vitro fertilization for sibling oocytes in cases of unexplained infertility and borderline semen. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1996;13:38–42. - PubMed
    1. Hershlag A, Paine T, Kvapil G, Feng H, Napolitano B. In vitro fertilizationintracytoplasmic sperm injection split: an insemination method to prevent fertilization failure. Fertil Steril. 2002;77:229–32. - PubMed
    1. Ruiz A, Remohi J, Minguez Y, Guanes PP, Simon C, Pellicer A. The role of in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection in couples with unexplained infertility after failed intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril. 1997;68:171–3. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms