z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
The relative myth of elective single embryo transfer
Author(s) -
Norbert Gleicher,
David H. Barad
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
human reproduction
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.446
H-Index - 226
eISSN - 1460-2350
pISSN - 0268-1161
DOI - 10.1093/humrep/del026
Subject(s) - single embryo transfer , set (abstract data type) , argument (complex analysis) , infertility , pregnancy , embryo transfer , preference , transfer (computing) , medicine , fertility , obstetrics , gynecology , intensive care medicine , psychology , economics , computer science , microeconomics , biology , environmental health , population , genetics , parallel computing , programming language
The option of single embryo transfer (SET) has recently dominated the pages of this and other medical journals. Opinions, in regards to the utility of such an approach, appear to differ between Europe and the US. While US guidelines promote a more individualized approach, European opinions, at times, even advocate mandated practice patterns. The European approach, however, fails to recognize the rather significant differences in supportive arguments between the historical switch from multiple embryo transfers to 2-embryo transfers and the current discussion, favouring a switch from 2-embryo transfer to elective (e)-SET. In the former, a significant risk of (at times, high-order) multiple pregnancies was reduced without loss of pregnancy potential. In the latter, a comparably relatively low twinning risk is reduced at the expense of declining pregnancy rates, a need for more treatment cycles, a potential delay in treatment success and, potentially, higher treatment costs. These consequences of e-SET, together with the preference of some infertility patients to actually conceive twins, raise serious questions about the wide utilization of e-SET, as has been propagated by many authorities. According to US guidelines, e-SET, therefore, appears to represent an appropriate transfer option for only a small minority of IVF patients. Argument in favour of indiscriminate SET appears unrealistic and should be reconsidered.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom