Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research · 2026
Economic evaluations of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) for specialized infertility treatment: a systematic review of IVF, IUI and ICSI.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Khakian Mehdi, Souresrafil Aghdas, Farzaneh Farahnaz, Rezapour Aziz
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Couples suffering from infertility range between 10 and 15% worldwide. As assisted reproductive technologies revolutionize treatment, this systematic review synthesizes economic evaluations of these ART methods to identify cost-effective ones.
METHODS: A search of the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus databases and Google Scholar was conducted from 1990 to 2024 to find full economic analyses studies of IVF, IUI, and ICSI. Comparing at least two ART methods for infertile couples or strategies within amethod is one of the incl usion criteria. Qualitative descriptions and summaries provided concerning the cost-effectiveness of all interventions. A comprehensive narrative synthesis of the data developed. This categorized based on the type of intervention.
RESULTS: A total of 102 studies were included, mostly from CEAs. In cases of poor prognosis, IVF is the most cost-effective treatment option, while IUI is the most cost-effective in cases of mild prognosis. While ICSI is not recommended routinely for non-male factor infertility, it is an effective treatment for severe male factor infertility. Age and etiology were identified as key factors influencing the cost-effectiveness results.
CONCLUSION: Prognosis-based strategies (such as IUI first for mild cases, selective ICSI) are more cost effective.
REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD420251242666).
METHODS: A search of the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus databases and Google Scholar was conducted from 1990 to 2024 to find full economic analyses studies of IVF, IUI, and ICSI. Comparing at least two ART methods for infertile couples or strategies within amethod is one of the incl usion criteria. Qualitative descriptions and summaries provided concerning the cost-effectiveness of all interventions. A comprehensive narrative synthesis of the data developed. This categorized based on the type of intervention.
RESULTS: A total of 102 studies were included, mostly from CEAs. In cases of poor prognosis, IVF is the most cost-effective treatment option, while IUI is the most cost-effective in cases of mild prognosis. While ICSI is not recommended routinely for non-male factor infertility, it is an effective treatment for severe male factor infertility. Age and etiology were identified as key factors influencing the cost-effectiveness results.
CONCLUSION: Prognosis-based strategies (such as IUI first for mild cases, selective ICSI) are more cost effective.
REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD420251242666).