814 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19318704)
1. Elective single embryo transfer with cryopreservation improves the outcome and diminishes the costs of IVF/ICSI.
Veleva Z; Karinen P; Tomás C; Tapanainen JS; Martikainen H
Hum Reprod; 2009 Jul; 24(7):1632-9. PubMed ID: 19318704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Elective single embryo transfer in women aged 36-39 years.
Veleva Z; Vilska S; Hydén-Granskog C; Tiitinen A; Tapanainen JS; Martikainen H
Hum Reprod; 2006 Aug; 21(8):2098-102. PubMed ID: 16740524
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A real-life prospective health economic study of elective single embryo transfer versus two-embryo transfer in first IVF/ICSI cycles.
Gerris J; De Sutter P; De Neubourg D; Van Royen E; Vander Elst J; Mangelschots K; Vercruyssen M; Kok P; Elseviers M; Annemans L; Pauwels P; Dhont M
Hum Reprod; 2004 Apr; 19(4):917-23. PubMed ID: 14990547
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Elective single embryo transfer following in vitro fertilization.
Min JK; Hughes E; Young D; ;
J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2010 Apr; 32(4):363-377. PubMed ID: 20500945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Elective single embryo transfer (eSET) policy in the first three IVF/ICSI treatment cycles.
van Montfoort AP; Dumoulin JC; Land JA; Coonen E; Derhaag JG; Evers JL
Hum Reprod; 2005 Feb; 20(2):433-6. PubMed ID: 15550492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Elective single-embryo transfer in women aged 40-44 years.
Niinimäki M; Suikkari AM; Mäkinen S; Söderström-Anttila V; Martikainen H
Hum Reprod; 2013 Feb; 28(2):331-5. PubMed ID: 23175499
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Single versus double embryo transfer: cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomized clinical trial.
Fiddelers AA; van Montfoort AP; Dirksen CD; Dumoulin JC; Land JA; Dunselman GA; Janssen JM; Severens JL; Evers JL
Hum Reprod; 2006 Aug; 21(8):2090-7. PubMed ID: 16613886
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Day 2 elective single embryo transfer in clinical practice: better outcome in ICSI cycles.
Martikainen H; Orava M; Lakkakorpi J; Tuomivaara L
Hum Reprod; 2004 Jun; 19(6):1364-6. PubMed ID: 15105390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Cumulative results including obstetrical and neonatal outcome of fresh and frozen-thawed cycles in elective single versus double fresh embryo transfers.
Fauque P; Jouannet P; Davy C; Guibert J; Viallon V; Epelboin S; Kunstmann JM; Patrat C
Fertil Steril; 2010 Aug; 94(3):927-35. PubMed ID: 19446806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Reducing twin pregnancy rates after IVF--elective single embryo transfer (eSET).
Milne P; Cottell E; Allen C; Spillane H; Vasallo J; Wingfield M
Ir Med J; 2010 Jan; 103(1):9-11. PubMed ID: 20222385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Modified natural cycle versus controlled ovarian hyperstimulation IVF: a cost-effectiveness evaluation of three simulated treatment scenarios.
Groen H; Tonch N; Simons AH; van der Veen F; Hoek A; Land JA
Hum Reprod; 2013 Dec; 28(12):3236-46. PubMed ID: 24166594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Economic evaluation of elective single-embryo transfer with subsequent single frozen embryo transfer in an in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection program.
Hernandez Torres E; Navarro-Espigares JL; Clavero A; López-Regalado M; Camacho-Ballesta JA; Onieva-García M; Martínez L; Castilla JA
Fertil Steril; 2015 Mar; 103(3):699-706. PubMed ID: 25557244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Cost-effectiveness of seven IVF strategies: results of a Markov decision-analytic model.
Fiddelers AA; Dirksen CD; Dumoulin JC; van Montfoort AP; Land JA; Janssen JM; Evers JL; Severens JL
Hum Reprod; 2009 Jul; 24(7):1648-55. PubMed ID: 19318703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. How to demonstrate that eSET does not compromise the likelihood of having a baby?
Bechoua S; Astruc K; Thouvenot S; Girod S; Chiron A; Jimenez C; Sagot P
Hum Reprod; 2009 Dec; 24(12):3073-81. PubMed ID: 19752013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Human chorionic gonadotropin levels in early IVF/ICSI pregnancies are higher in singletons after single embryo transfer compared with singletons after double embryo transfer.
Delbaere I; Vansteelandt S; Gerris J; De Sutter P; De Bacquer D; Temmerman M
Hum Reprod; 2008 Nov; 23(11):2421-6. PubMed ID: 18664472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Prospective evaluation of elective single-embryo transfer versus double-embryo transfer following in vitro fertilization: a two-year French hospital experience].
Leniaud L; Poncelet C; Porcher R; Martin-Pont B; Cédrin-Durnerin I; Hugues JN; Wolf JP; Sifer C
Gynecol Obstet Fertil; 2008 Feb; 36(2):159-165. PubMed ID: 18255330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Economic evaluations of single- versus double-embryo transfer in IVF.
Fiddelers AA; Severens JL; Dirksen CD; Dumoulin JC; Land JA; Evers JL
Hum Reprod Update; 2007; 13(1):5-13. PubMed ID: 17099208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Clinical effects of oocyte cryopreservation in assisted reproduction technology].
Wang W; Yan ZJ; Cai LB; Chai DC; Liu CZ; Mao YD; Liu JY
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2008 Oct; 88(39):2755-8. PubMed ID: 19080449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Randomized single versus double embryo transfer: obstetric and paediatric outcome and a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Kjellberg AT; Carlsson P; Bergh C
Hum Reprod; 2006 Jan; 21(1):210-6. PubMed ID: 16172148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Cost-effectiveness of embryo transfer strategies: a decision analytic model using long-term costs and consequences of singletons and multiples born as a consequence of IVF.
van Heesch MM; van Asselt AD; Evers JL; van der Hoeven MA; Dumoulin JC; van Beijsterveldt CE; Bonsel GJ; Dykgraaf RH; van Goudoever JB; Koopman-Esseboom C; Nelen WL; Steiner K; Tamminga P; Tonch N; Torrance HL; Dirksen CD
Hum Reprod; 2016 Nov; 31(11):2527-2540. PubMed ID: 27907897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
