Skip Navigation


Human Reproduction Update Advance Access originally published online on October 28, 2004
Human Reproduction Update 2005 11(2):105-121; doi:10.1093/humupd/dmh049
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
11/2/105    most recent
dmh049v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (33)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gerris, J. M.R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gerris, J. M.R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction Update Vol. 11 No. 2 © European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology 2004; all rights reserved

Single embryo transfer and IVF/ICSI outcome: a balanced appraisal

Jan M.R. Gerris

Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Middelheim Hospital, Lindendreef 1, Antwerp, Belgium

Email:jan.gerris{at}zna.be

This review considers the value of single embryo transfer (SET) to prevent multiple pregnancies (MP) after IVF/ICSI. The incidence of MP (twins and higher order pregnancies) after IVF/ICSI is much higher (~30%) than after natural conception (~1%). Approximately half of all the neonates are multiples. The obstetric, neonatal and long-term consequences for the health of these children are enormous and costs incurred extremely high. Judicious SET is the only method to decrease this epidemic of iatrogenic multiple gestations. Clinical trials have shown that programmes with >50% of SET maintain high overall ongoing pregnancy rates (~30% per started cycle) while reducing the MP rate to <10%. Experience with SET remains largely European although the need to reduce MP is accepted worldwide. An important issue is how to select patients suitable for SET and embryos with a high putative implantation potential. The typical patient suitable for SET is young (aged <36 years) and in her first or second IVF/ICSI trial. Embryo selection is performed using one or a combination of embryo characteristics. Available evidence suggests that, for the overall population, day 3 and day 5 selection yield similar results but better than zygote selection results. Prospective studies correlating embryo characteristics with documented implantation potential, utilizing databases of individual embryos, are needed. The application of SET should be supported by other measures: reimbursement of IVF/ICSI (earned back by reducing costs), optimized cryopreservation to augment cumulative pregnancy rates per oocyte harvest and a standardized format for reporting results. To make SET the standard of care in the appropriate target group, there is a need for more clinical studies, for intensive counselling of patients, and for an increased sense of responsibility in patients, health care providers and health insurers.

Key words: IVF / ICSI / multiple pregnancy reduction / single embryo transfer


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
S. L. Boulet, L. A. Schieve, A. Nannini, C. Ferre, O. Devine, B. Cohen, Z. Zhang, V. Wright, and M. Macaluso
Perinatal outcomes of twin births conceived using assisted reproduction technology: a population-based study
Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2008; 23(8): 1941 - 1948.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Biol. Reprod.Home page
A. Bettegowda, O. V. Patel, K.-B. Lee, K.-E. Park, M. Salem, J. Yao, J. J. Ireland, and G. W. Smith
Identification of Novel Bovine Cumulus Cell Molecular Markers Predictive of Oocyte Competence: Functional and Diagnostic Implications
Biol Reprod, August 1, 2008; 79(2): 301 - 309.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 The Obstetrician and GynaecologistHome page
I. Kosmas, J. Van der Elst, P. Devroey, and H. Tournaye
Elective single embryo transfer
Obstet Gynaecol (Lond), July 1, 2008; 10(3): 163 - 169.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol Hum ReprodHome page
A. P.A. van Montfoort, J. P.M. Geraedts, J. C.M. Dumoulin, A. P.M. Stassen, J. L.H. Evers, and T. A.Y. Ayoubi
Differential gene expression in cumulus cells as a prognostic indicator of embryo viability: a microarray analysis
Mol. Hum. Reprod., March 1, 2008; 14(3): 157 - 168.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
G. Pennings and W. Ombelet
Coming soon to your clinic: patient-friendly ART
Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2007; 22(8): 2075 - 2079.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
M.F.G. Verberg, M.J.C. Eijkemans, N.S. Macklon, E.M.E.W. Heijnen, B.C.J.M. Fauser, and F.J. Broekmans
Predictors of low response to mild ovarian stimulation initiated on cycle day 5 for IVF
Hum. Reprod., July 1, 2007; 22(7): 1919 - 1924.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Obstet GynecolHome page
U. M. Reddy, R. J. Wapner, R. W. Rebar, and R. J. Tasca
Infertility, Assisted Reproductive Technology, and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes: Executive Summary of a National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Workshop
Obstet. Gynecol., April 1, 2007; 109(4): 967 - 977.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
P. Donoso, W. Verpoest, E.G. Papanikolaou, I. Liebaers, H.M. Fatemi, K. Sermon, C. Staessen, J. Van der Elst, and P. Devroey
Single embryo transfer in preimplantation genetic diagnosis cycles for women <36 years does not reduce delivery rate
Hum. Reprod., April 1, 2007; 22(4): 1021 - 1025.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
A.A.A. Fiddelers, J.L. Severens, C.D. Dirksen, J.C.M. Dumoulin, J.A. Land, and J.L.H. Evers
Economic evaluations of single- versus double-embryo transfer in IVF
Hum. Reprod. Update, January 1, 2007; 13(1): 5 - 13.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
M.J. Pelinck, N.E.A. Vogel, A. Hoek, A.H.M. Simons, E.G.J.M. Arts, M.H. Mochtar, S. Beemsterboer, M.N. Hondelink, and M.J. Heineman
Cumulative pregnancy rates after three cycles of minimal stimulation IVF and results according to subfertility diagnosis: a multicentre cohort study
Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2006; 21(9): 2375 - 2383.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
D. Hvidtjorn, J. Grove, D. E. Schendel, M. Vaeth, E. Ernst, L. F. Nielsen, and P. Thorsen
Cerebral Palsy Among Children Born After in Vitro Fertilization: The Role of Preterm Delivery--A Population-Based, Cohort Study
Pediatrics, August 1, 2006; 118(2): 475 - 482.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
R. Tang, J. Catt, and D. Howlett
Towards defining parameters for a successful single embryo transfer in frozen cycles
Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2006; 21(5): 1179 - 1183.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
D. De Neubourg and J. Gerris
What about the remaining twins since single-embryo transfer? How far can (should) we go?
Hum. Reprod., April 1, 2006; 21(4): 843 - 846.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NEJMHome page
E. G. Papanikolaou, M. Camus, E. M. Kolibianakis, L. Van Landuyt, A. Van Steirteghem, and P. Devroey
In vitro fertilization with single blastocyst-stage versus single cleavage-stage embryos.
N. Engl. J. Med., March 16, 2006; 354(11): 1139 - 1146.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NEJMHome page
L. A. Schieve
The promise of single-embryo transfer.
N. Engl. J. Med., March 16, 2006; 354(11): 1190 - 1193.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
M.A. Reynolds and L.A. Schieve
Trends in embryo transfer practices and multiple gestation for IVF procedures in the USA, 1996-2002
Hum. Reprod., March 1, 2006; 21(3): 694 - 700.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.