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, Omar Galárraga, Peter C. Klatsky, Jared C. Robins, Sandra A. Carson, Andrew S. Blazar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalFertility and Sterility
Volume100
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2013

Fingerprint

Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injections
Fertilization in Vitro
Infertility
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Live Birth
Birth Rate
Costs and Cost Analysis
Insemination
Fertilization
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

Keywords

  • Cost-effectiveness
  • split IVF-ICSI
  • unexplained infertility

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Reproductive Medicine

Cite this

Management of the first in vitro fertilization cycle for unexplained infertility : A cost-effectiveness analysis of split in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection. / Vitek, Wendy S.; Galárraga, Omar; Klatsky, Peter C.; Robins, Jared C.; Carson, Sandra A.; Blazar, Andrew S.

In: Fertility and Sterility, Vol. 100, No. 5, 11.2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Vitek, Wendy S. ; Galárraga, Omar ; Klatsky, Peter C. ; Robins, Jared C. ; Carson, Sandra A. ; Blazar, Andrew S. / Management of the first in vitro fertilization cycle for unexplained infertility : A cost-effectiveness analysis of split in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection. In: Fertility and Sterility. 2013 ; Vol. 100, No. 5.
@article{59bc029681a6473bb91e39180b3c3800,
title = "Management of the first in vitro fertilization cycle for unexplained infertility: A cost-effectiveness analysis of split in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection",
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",
author = "Vitek, {Wendy S.} and Omar Gal{\'a}rraga and Klatsky, {Peter C.} and Robins, {Jared C.} and Carson, {Sandra A.} and Blazar, {Andrew S.}",
year = "2013",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.06.035",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "100",
journal = "Fertility and Sterility",
issn = "0015-0282",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Management of the first in vitro fertilization cycle for unexplained infertility

T2 - A cost-effectiveness analysis of split in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection

AU - Vitek, Wendy S.

AU - Galárraga, Omar

AU - Klatsky, Peter C.

AU - Robins, Jared C.

AU - Carson, Sandra A.

AU - Blazar, Andrew S.

PY - 2013/11

Y1 - 2013/11

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Cost-effectiveness

KW - split IVF-ICSI

KW - unexplained infertility

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84887122262&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84887122262&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.06.035

DO - 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.06.035

M3 - Article

C2 - 23876534

AN - SCOPUS:84887122262

VL - 100

JO - Fertility and Sterility

JF - Fertility and Sterility

SN - 0015-0282

IS - 5

ER -