International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2021
Virtual sonographic hysteroscopy in assisted reproduction: A retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Vitale Salvatore Giovanni, Laganà Antonio Simone, Török Péter, Lasmar Ricardo Bassil, Carugno Jose, Palumbo Marco, Tesarik Jan
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the cost-effectiveness of virtual sonographic hysteroscopy (VSH) performed before in vitro fertilization (IVF) (Scenario 1), frozen embryo transfer (Scenario 2), and oocyte donation (Scenario 3) attempts.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of data extracted from patients' files was conducted. Before undergoing the assigned treatment, VSH was offered to all patients. Cost-effectiveness was calculated on the basis of cost per live birth. The total cost was compared with a control group of patients who declined to have hysteroscopy before their treatment.
RESULTS: A total of 292 women were involved. Virtual sonographic hysteroscopy was performed in 192 women. Conventional operative hysteroscopy was subsequently required in 34 of them (17.7%). Subsequent assisted reproduction attempts resulted in live birth in 111 women-34/69 (49.3%), 35/69 (50.7%), and 42/54 (77.8%) in Scenarios 1, 2, and 3, respectively. This compared favorably with 100 women who declined VSH, with live birth achieved in 15/39 (38.5%), 14/37 (37.8%), and 15/24 (62.5%) in Scenarios 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The overall cost-effectiveness of VSH compared favorably with straightforward treatment performed without this test.
CONCLUSION: The overall cost-effectiveness of treatment attempts carried out after previous VSH compared favorably with straightforward treatment performed without this test.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of data extracted from patients' files was conducted. Before undergoing the assigned treatment, VSH was offered to all patients. Cost-effectiveness was calculated on the basis of cost per live birth. The total cost was compared with a control group of patients who declined to have hysteroscopy before their treatment.
RESULTS: A total of 292 women were involved. Virtual sonographic hysteroscopy was performed in 192 women. Conventional operative hysteroscopy was subsequently required in 34 of them (17.7%). Subsequent assisted reproduction attempts resulted in live birth in 111 women-34/69 (49.3%), 35/69 (50.7%), and 42/54 (77.8%) in Scenarios 1, 2, and 3, respectively. This compared favorably with 100 women who declined VSH, with live birth achieved in 15/39 (38.5%), 14/37 (37.8%), and 15/24 (62.5%) in Scenarios 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The overall cost-effectiveness of VSH compared favorably with straightforward treatment performed without this test.
CONCLUSION: The overall cost-effectiveness of treatment attempts carried out after previous VSH compared favorably with straightforward treatment performed without this test.