Assisted conception and multiple pregnancies: methods of reducing multiples from assisted reproduction

References

• Ozturk O, Templeton A. Multiple pregnancy in assisted reproduction techniques. In: Current Practices and Controversies in Assisted Reproduction. Report of a WHO meeting. World Health Organization. Geneva, Switzerland 220–234 (2002).
   Google Scholar
• 2002 Assisted Reproductive Technology Success Rates. National Summary and Fertility Clinic Reports. US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Buckett W, Tan SL. What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? The importance of informed choice. Hum. Reprod.19, 1043–1045 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stassen C, Janssenswillen C, van den Abbeel E, Devroey P, van Steirteghem AC. Avoidance of triplet pregnancies by elective transfer of two good quality embryos. Hum. Reprod.10(8), 1650–1653 (1993).
   Google Scholar
• Templeton A, Morris JK. Reducing the risk of multiple births by transfer of two embryos after in vitro fertilization. N. Engl. J. Med.339, 573–577 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Licciardi F, Berkeley AS, Noyes N, Krey L, Grifo JA. A two versus three embryo transfer: the oocyte donation model. Fertil. Steril.75, 510–513 (2001).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Anderson AN, Gianaroli L, Felberbaum R, de Mouzon J, Nygren KG, The European IVF monitoring Programme (EIM), European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2001. Results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum. Reprod.20(5), 1158–1176 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Berkowitz RL, Lynch L, Stone J, Alvarez M. The current status of multifetal pregnancy reduction. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.174, 1265–1272 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papanikolaou EG, Camus M, Kolibianakis EM, van Landuyt L, van Steirteghem A, Devroey P. In vitro fertilization with single blastocyst-stage versus single cleavage-stage embryos. N. Engl. J Med.354(11), 1139–1146 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bavister BD, Boatman DE. The neglected human blastocyst revisited. Hum. Reprod.12, 1606–1618 (1997).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blake D, Proctor M, Johnson N, Olive D. Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted conception (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, Oxford, UK Update Software (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Pandian Z, Templeton A, Serour G, Bhattacharya S. Number of embryos for transfer after IVF and ICSI. A Cochrane Review. Hum. Reprod.10, 2681–2687 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Gerris J, De Neubourg D, Mangelschots K et al. Prevention of twin pregnancy after in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection based on strict embryo criteria: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Hum. Reprod.14, 2581–2587 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martikainen H, Tiitinen A, Candido T, et al. One versus two embryo transfer after IVF and ICSI: a randomised study. Hum. Reprod.16(9), 1900–1903 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lukassen HGM, Braat DDM, Zeilhuis GA, Adang EM, Kremer JAM. 2X1 versus 1X2, a randomized study. Hum. Reprod.17, Abs. Book 1, 1 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thurin A, Hausken J, Hillensjo T et al. Elective single embryo transfer in IVF, a randomized study. Abstracts of the 20th Annual Meeting of the ESHRE, Berlin, Germany, 0–170, i60 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• van Montfoort P, Fiddelers AA, Janssen JM et al. In unselected patients, elective single embryo transfer prevents all multiples, but results in significantly lower pregnancy rates compared with double embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Hum. Reprod.21(2), 338–343 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dodd JM, Crowther CA. Reduction of the number of fetuses for women with triplet and higher order multiple pregnancies. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews2, CD003932 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Gerris JMR. Single embryo transfer and IVF/ICSI outcome: a balanced appraisal. Hum. Reprod. Update11(2), 105–121 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunault CC, Eijkemans MJC, Pieters MHEC. et al. A prediction model for selecting patients undergoing in vitro fertilisation for elective single embryo transfer. Fertil. Steril.77(4), 725–732 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiitinen A, Halttunen M, Harkki P. Elective single embryo transfer: the value of cryopreservation. Hum. Reprod.16(6), 1140–1144 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiitinen A, Hyden-Granskog C, Gissler M. What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? The value of cryopreservation on cumulative pregnancy rates per single oocyte retrieval should not be forgotten. Hum. Reprod.19(11), 2439–2441 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• van den Abeel E, Camus M, van Wasesberghe L, Devrey P, van Steirtenghem AC. Viability of partially damaged human embryos after cryopreservation. Hum. Reprod.12(9), 2006–2010 (1997).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vail A, Gardener E. Common statistical errors in the design and analysis of subfertility trials. Hum. Reprod.18, 1000–1004 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Min JK, Breheny SA, MacLachlan V, Healy DL. What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? The singleton, term gestation, live birth rate per cycle initiated: the BESST endpoint for assisted reproduction. Hum. Reprod.19, 3–7 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Hazekamp J, Bergh C, Wennerholm UB, Hovatta O, Karlstrom PO, Selbing A. Avoiding multiple pregnancies in ART. Consideration of new strategies. Hum. Reprod.15(6), 1217–1219 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gleicher N, Campbell DP, Chan CL et al. The desire for multiple births in couples with infertility problems contradicts present practice patterns. Hum. Reprod.10, 1079–1084 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinborg, Loft A, Schmidt L, Andersen AN. Attitudes of IVF/ICSI – twin mothers towards twins and single embryo transfer. Hum. Reprod.18(3), 621–627 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Murray S, Shetty A, Rattray A, Taylor V, Bhattacharya S. A randomized comparison of alternative methods of information provision on the acceptability of elective single embryo transfer. Hum. Reprod.19(4), 911–916 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scotland G, McNamee P, Peddie V, Bhattacharya S. Safety versus success in elective single embryo transfer: women’s preferences for outcomes of in vitro fertilisation. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.114(8), 977–983 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Ombelet W, De Sutter P, Van der Elst J, Martens G. Multiple gestation and infertility treatment: registration, reflection and reaction–the Belgian project. Hum. Reprod. Update11(1), 3–14 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Olofsson JI, Borg K, Hardarson T et al. Effects of novel legislation on embryo transfer policy, results and pregnancy outcome in a Swedish IVF unit. Abstracts of the 20th Annual Meeting of the ESHRE, Berlin, Germany, 0–169, i59 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Saldeen P, Sundstrom P. Would legislation imposing single embryo transfer be a feasible way to reduce the rate of multiple pregnancies after IVF treatment? Hum. Reprod.20(1), 4–8 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar