Economic evaluation of elective single embryo transfer with subsequent single frozen embryo transfer in an in vitro fertilization intracytoplasmic sperm injection program

The choice of elective single-embryo transfer strategy to be adopted should be determined by the context of the health system and the individual prognosis.


Elisa Hernandez Torres, M.Sc., José Luis Navarro-Espigares, Ph.D., Ana Clavero, M.D., Ph.D., MaLuisa López-Regalado, M.Sc., Jose Antonio Camacho-Ballesta, Ph.D., MaÁngeles Onieva-García, M.Sc., Luis Martínez, M.D., Ph.D., Jose Antonio Castilla, M.D., Ph.D.

Volume 103, Issue 3, Pages 699-706



To analyze the cost-effectiveness of IVF-ICSI cycles with elective single-embryo transfer (eSET), plus elective single frozen embryo transfer (eSFET) if pregnancy is not achieved, compared with double-embryo transfer (DET).


Cost-effectiveness analysis.


Public hospital.


A population of 121 women (


We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis using the results of a prospective clinical trial. The women in group 1 received eSET plus eSFET, and those in group 2 received DET. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed.

Main Outcome Measure(s):

Live birth delivery rate.


The cumulative live birth delivery rate was 38.60% in the eSET+eSFET group versus 42.19% in the DET group. The mean costs per patient were €5,614.11 in the eSET+eSFET group and €5,562.29 in the DET group. These differences were not statistically significant. The rate of multiple gestation was significantly lower in the eSET group than in the DET group (0 vs. 25.9%).


This study does not show that eSET is superior to DET in terms of effectiveness or of costs. The lack of superiority of the results for the eSET+eSFET and the DET groups corroborates that the choice of strategy to be adopted should be determined by the context of the health care system and the individual prognosis.

Read the full text at: