SUCCESS CRITERIA IN ASSISTED REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMS


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Objective. To carry out a systematic analysis of the data of Russian and foreign scientific literature on the choice of estimation success criteria in the use of assisted reproductive technologies. Subject and methods. The review included the data of foreign and Russian articles found in Pubmed on this topic among those published in the past decade. Results. The IFV success criteria affect the choice of embryo selection strategy. It is necessary to identify the best embryos if the conception success rate calculated for fresh embryo transfer is the most important criterion. Less importance is attached to embryo selection if the cumulative conception rate is a main criterion. Conclusion. The success criterion is one of the reproductive medicine needs. The cumulative conception rate calculated for transvaginal puncture become increasingly important; moreover, that estimated for fresh embryo transfer remains appropriate.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Mariya Gennadyevna Andreyeva

Central Clinical Hospital with Polyclinic, Department for Presidential Affairs of the Russian Federation; Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: onishchenkomaria@mail.ru
physician, Assisted Reproductive Technologies Department 121359, Russia, Moscow, Marshala Timoshenko str. 15; Moscow 117997, Ac. Oparina str. 4, Russia

Elena Anatolyevna Kalinina

Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: e_kalinina@oparina4.ru
MD, Head of the Assisted Reproductive Technologies in Infertility Treatment Department 117997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparina str. 4

Sergey Alexandrovich Dyakonov

Department for Presidential Affairs of the Russian Federation

Email: sergey.diyakonov@gmail.com
PhD, physician, Assisted Reproductive Technologies Department 121359, Russia, Moscow, Marshala Timoshenko str. 15

References

  1. Alper М.М., Brinsden P.R., Fischer R., Wikland M. Is your IVF programme good? Hum. Reprod. 2002; 17(1): 8-10.
  2. Connolly M.R, Hoorens S., Chambers G.M. The costs and consequences of assisted reproductive technology: an economic perspective. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2010; 16(6): 603-13.
  3. Maheshwari A., Griffiths S., Bhattacharya S. Global variations in the uptake of single embryo transfer. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2011; 17(1): 107-20.
  4. Garrido N., Bellver J., Remohi J., Simon C., Pellicer A. Cumulative live-birth rates per total number of embryos needed to reach newborn in consecutive in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles: A new approach to measuring the likelihood of IVF success. Fertil. Steril. 2011; 96(1): 40-6.
  5. Zollner U., DietlJ. Perinatal risks after IVF and ICSI. J. Perinat. Med 2013; 41(1): 17-22.
  6. PinborgA., Wennerholm U.B., Romundstad L.B., Loft A., Aittomaki K., Soderstrom- Anttila V et al. Why do singletons conceived after assisted reproduction technology have adverse perinatal outcome? Systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2013; 19(2): 87-104.
  7. Henningsen A.K., PinborgA., Lidegaard 0., Vestergaard C., Forman J.L., Andersen A.N. Perinatal outcome of singleton siblings born after assisted reproductive technology and spontaneous conception: Danish national sibling-cohort study. Fertil. Steril. 2011; 95(3): 959-63.
  8. Romundstad L.B., Romundstad P.R., Sunde A., von During V., Skjserven R., Vatten L.J. Increased risk of placenta previa in pregnancies following IVF/ICSI; a comparison of ART and non-ART pregnancies in the same mother. Hum. Reprod. 2006; 21(9): 2353-8.
  9. Dumoulin J.C., Land J., Van Montfoort A.P., Nelissen E.S., Coonen E., Derhaa J.G., Evers J.L. Effect of in vitro culture of human embryos on birthweight of newborns. Hum. Reprod 2010; 25(3): 605-12.
  10. Scherre U., Rimoldi S.F., Rexhaj E., Stuber T, Duplain H., Garcin S. et al. Systemic and pulmonary vascular dysfunction in children conceived by assisted reproductive technologies. Circulation. 2012; 125(15): 1890-6.
  11. Rimoldi S., Sartori C., Rexhaj E, Cerny D., Von A., Soria R. et al. Vascular dysfunction in children conceived by assisted reproductive technologies: underlying mechanisms and future implications. Swiss. Med. Wkly. 2014; 144: wl3973.
  12. Sunde A., Balaban B. The assisted reproductive technology laboratory: toward. Fertil. Steril. 2013; 100(2): 310-8.
  13. Регистр вспомогательных репродуктивных технологий Российской ассоциации репродукции человека. Отчет за 2013 год.
  14. Мартазанова Б.А., Мишиева Н.Г, Абубакиров А.Н. Замена триггера овуляции как метод профилактики развития синдрома гиперстимуляции яичников. Акушерство и гинекология. 2014; 5: 15-8
  15. Калинина E.A., Эбзеева M.B., Кузьмичев Л.Н. Опыт применения «мягких» схем стимуляции суперовуляции у пациенток группы риска развития синдрома гиперстимуляции яичников. Акушерство и гинекология. 2010; 6: 60-4
  16. Долгушина H.B., Сокур C.A., Горшкова А.Г., Споришева Л.Н, Калинина Е.А. Преимплантационный генетический скрининг у супружеских пар с пато- зооспермией: анализ затраты-эффективность. Акушерство и гинекология. 2014; 4: 51-61
  17. Долгушина H.B., Сыркашева А.Г, Макарова Н.П., Беднягш Л.Л., Казакова В.В., Калинина Е.Л. Преимплантационный генетический скрининг у супружеских пар с дисморфизмами ооцитов: анализ затраты-эффективность. Акушерство и гинекология. 2015; 9:47-55.
  18. Balaban B., Urman B., Ala В., Isiklar А., Larman M. G., Hamilton R., Gardner D.K. A randomized controlled study of human Day 3 embryo cryopreservation by slow freezing or vitrification: vitrification is associated with higher survival, metabolism and blastocyst formation. Hum. Reprod. 2008; 23(9): 1976-82.
  19. Mastenbroek S., Van Der Veen F, Aflatoonian A., Shapiro B., Bossuyt P, Repping S. Embryo selection in IVF. Hum. Reprod. 2011; 26(5): 964-6.
  20. Сыркашева А.Г., Долгушина H.B., Макарова Н.П., Ковальская Е.В., Агаршева М.Л. Исходы программ вспомогательных репродуктивных технологий у пациенток с дисморфизмами ооцитов. Акушерство и гинекология. 2015; 7: 56-62.
  21. Сокур C.A., Долгушина H.B., Глинкина Ж.И., Горшкова А.Г., Калинина Е.Л. Влияние уровня анеуплоидии хромосом в сперматозоидах на развитие анеуплоидии эмбрионов и исходы программ вспомогательных репродуктивных технологий. Гинекология. 2013; 15(6): 38-41.
  22. Thurin A., Hausken J., Hillensjd T, Jablonowska B., Pinborg A., Strandell A., Bergh C. Elective single-embryo transfer versus double-embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization. N. Engl. J. Med. 2004; 351(23): 2392-402.
  23. Mc Lernon D.J., Harrild K, Bergh C., Davies M.J., de Neubourg D., Dumoulin J.C. et al. Clinical effectiveness of elective single versus double embryo transfer: metaanalysis of individual patient data from randomised trials. BMJ. 2010; 341: c6945.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies