These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Recombinant versus urinary follicle-stimulating hormone in intrauterine insemination cycles: a prospective, randomized analysis of cost effectiveness.
    Author: Gerli S, Casini ML, Unfer V, Costabile L, Bini V, Di Renzo GC.
    Journal: Fertil Steril; 2004 Sep; 82(3):573-8. PubMed ID: 15374698.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical results and the cost effectiveness of urinary FSH and recombinant FSH in ovarian stimulation for IUI cycles. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized trial. SETTING: University Hospital, Perugia, and A.G.UN.CO. Obstetrics and Gynaecology Centre, Rome, Italy. PATIENT(S): IUI cycles were performed in 67 infertile patients. INTERVENTION(S): Protocols of ovarian stimulation with urinary FSH or recombinant FSH were randomly assigned, for a total of 138 cycles performed (67 and 71, respectively). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Number of mature follicles, days of stimulation, number of ampules, and IU used per cycle, biochemical/clinical pregnancy rates and cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULT(S): Follicular development, length of stimulation, pregnancy and delivery rates were not statistically different. Although in the urinary FSH group a significantly higher number of IU of gonadotropins were used (815.5 +/- 284.9 vs. 596.0 +/- 253.8), the cost per cycle remained significantly lower (220.73 +/- 94.72 vs. 318.50 +/- 125.21). The cost-effectiveness ratio was 1,848.61 euro in the urinary FSH group and 2,512.61 euro in the recombinant FSH group. CONCLUSION(S): Urinary FSH and recombinant FSH are both effective in ovarian stimulation in IUI cycles. The urinary preparation is more cost effective due to the difference of its cost per IU.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]