MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2300096243 · doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.01.007

Guidelines for the number of embryos to transfer following in vitro fertilization

2008· review· en· W2300096243 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · 2008
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLive birthEmbryo transferIn vitro fertilisationIntracytoplasmic sperm injectionPregnancyMedicineGynecologyObstetricsInfertilityGestationGuidelineReproductive medicinePregnancy rateSingle Embryo TransferAndrologyBiologyPathology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To review the effect of the number of embryos transferred on the outcome of in vitro fertilization (IVF), to provide guidelines on the number of embryos to transfer in IVF-embryo transfer (ET) in order to optimize healthy live births and minimize multiple pregnancies. OPTIONS: Rates of live birth, clinical pregnancy, and multiple pregnancy or birth by number of embryos transferred are compared. OUTCOMES: Clinical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, and live birth rates. EVIDENCE: The Cochrane Library and MEDLINE were searched for English language articles from 1990 to April 2006. Search terms included embryo transfer (ET), assisted reproduction, in vitro fertilization (IVF), intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), multiple pregnancy, and multiple gestation. Additional references were identified through hand searches of bibliographies of identified articles. VALUES: Available evidence was reviewed by the Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility Committee and the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Committee of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada and the Board of the Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society, and was qualified using the Evaluation of Evidence Guidelines developed by the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Exam. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: This guideline is intended to minimize the occurrence of multifetal gestation, particularly high-order multiples (HOM), while maintaining acceptable overall pregnancy and live birth rates following IVF-ET. RECOMMENDATIONS: The recommendations made in this guideline were derived mainly from studies of cleavage stage embryos-those cultured for two or three days. 1. Individual IVF-ET programs should evaluate their own data to identify patient-specific, embryo-specific, and cycle-specific determinants of implantation and live birth in order to develop embryo transfer policies that minimize the occurrence of multifetal gestation while maintaining acceptable overall pregnancy and live birth rates (III-B). 2. In general, consideration should be given to the transfer of fewer blastocyst stage embryos than cleavage stage embryos, particularly in women with excellent prognoses and high-quality blastocysts (I-A). SUMMARY STATEMENT: The following recommendations are generally intended for cleavage stage embryos transferred on day two or three. Because blastocyst stage embryos have higher implantation rates than cleavage stage embryos, fewer blastocyst stage embryos may need to be transferred (II). 3. In women under the age of 35 years, no more than two embryos should be transferred in a fresh IVF-ET cycle (II-2A). 4. In women under the age of 35 years with excellent prognoses, the transfer of a single embryo should be considered. Women with excellent prognoses include those undergoing their first or second IVF-ET cycle or one immediately following a successful IVF-ET cycle, with at least two high-quality embryos available for transfer (I-A). 5. In women aged 35 to 37 years, no more than three embryos should be transferred in a fresh IVF-ET cycle. In those with high-quality embryos and favorable prognoses, consideration should be given to the transfer of one or two embryos in the first or second cycle (II-2A). 6. In women aged 38 to 39 years, no more than three embryos should be transferred in a fresh IVF-ET cycle (III-B). In those with high-quality embryos and favorable prognoses, consideration should be given to the transfer of two embryos in the first or second cycle (III-B). 7. In women over the age of 39 years, no more than four embryos should be transferred in a fresh IVF-ET cycle (III-B). In those older women with high-quality embryos in excess of the number to be transferred, consideration should be given to the transfer of three embryos in the first IVF-ET cycle (III-B). 8. In exceptional cases when women with poor prognoses have had multiple failed fresh IVF-ET cycles, consideration may be given to the transfer of more embryos than recommended above in subsequent fresh IVF-ET cycles (III-C). 9. In donor-recipient cycles, the age of the oocyte/embryo donor should be used when determining the number of embryos to transfer (II-2B). 10. In women with obstetrical or medical contraindication to multifetal gestation, fewer embryos should be transferred to minimize the chance of multifetal gestation. In such cases, pre-treatment consultation with a maternal-fetal medicine specialist should be pursued (III-C). Whenever reasonable, consideration should be given to the transfer of a single embryo (II-3B). 11. Couples should be adequately counseled regarding the obstetrical, perinatal, and neonatal risks of multifetal gestation to facilitate informed decision making regarding the number of embryos to transfer (II-3B). Emphasis on healthy singleton live birth as the measure of success in IVF-ET may be beneficial in promoting a reduction in the number of embryos transferred (III-C). 12. A strategy for public funding of IVF-ET must be developed for the effective implementation of guidelines limiting the number of embryos transferred. In the context of this strategy, total health care costs would be lower as a result of reductions in the incidence of multifetal pregnancies and births (III-C). 13. Efforts should be made to limit iatrogenic multiple pregnancies resulting from non-IVF-ET ovarian stimulation through the development of suitable guidelines for cycle cancellation and the removal of financial barriers to IVF-ET (III-B). VALIDATION: This guideline was reviewed by the Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility Committee and the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Committee and approved by the Executive and Council of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada and the Board of the Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society. SPONSOR: Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. The quality of evidence reported in this document has been described using the Evaluation of Evidence criteria outlined in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Exam (Table 1).

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,022
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,071
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,036
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,118

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0220,071
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0040,006
Bibliométrie0,0090,007
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,002
Communication savante0,0020,003
Science ouverte0,0120,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0100,008
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0090,007

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,104
Tête enseignante GPT0,427
Écart entre enseignants0,323 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations65
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Journal of Gynecology & ObstetricsMême sujetAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyTravaux en français237 207