Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2006;6(18):1-63. Epub 2006 Oct 1.
The objective of this health technology policy assessment was to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of IVF for infertility treatment, as well as the role of IVF in reducing the rate of multiple pregnancies.
TARGET POPULATION AND CONDITION Typically defined as a failure to conceive after a year of regular unprotected intercourse, infertility affects 8% to 16% of reproductive age couples. The condition can be caused by disruptions at various steps of the reproductive process. Major causes of infertility include abnormalities of sperm, tubal obstruction, endometriosis, ovulatory disorder, and idiopathic infertility. Depending on the cause and patient characteristics, management options range from pharmacologic treatment to more advanced techniques referred to as assisted reproductive technologies (ART). ART include IVF and IVF-related procedures such as intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) and, according to some definitions, intra-uterine insemination (IUI), also known as artificial insemination. Almost invariably, an initial step in ART is controlled ovarian stimulation (COS), which leads to a significantly higher rate of multiple pregnancies after ART compared with that following natural conception. Multiple pregnancies are associated with a broad range of negative consequences for both mother and fetuses. Maternal complications include increased risk of pregnancy-induced hypertension, pre-eclampsia, polyhydramnios, gestational diabetes, fetal malpresentation requiring Caesarean section, postpartum haemorrhage, and postpartum depression. Babies from multiple pregnancies are at a significantly higher risk of early death, prematurity, and low birth weight, as well as mental and physical disabilities related to prematurity. Increased maternal and fetal morbidity leads to higher perinatal and neonatal costs of multiple pregnancies, as well as subsequent lifelong costs due to disabilities and an increased need for medical and social support.
IVF was first developed as a method to overcome bilateral Fallopian tube obstruction. The procedure includes several steps: (1) the woman's egg is retrieved from the ovaries; (2) exposed to sperm outside the body and fertilized; (3) the embryo(s) is cultured for 3 to 5 days; and (4) is transferred back to the uterus. IFV is considered to be one of the most effective treatments for infertility today. According to data from the Canadian Assisted Reproductive Technology Registry, the average live birth rate after IVF in Canada is around 30%, but there is considerable variation in the age of the mother and primary cause of infertility. An important advantage of IVF is that it allows for the control of the number of embryos transferred. An elective single embryo transfer in IVF cycles adopted in many European countries was shown to significantly reduce the risk of multiple pregnancies while maintaining acceptable birth rates. However, when number of embryos transferred is not limited, the rate of IVF-associated multiple pregnancies is similar to that of other treatments involving ovarian stimulation. The practice of multiple embryo transfer in IVF is often the result of pressures to increase success rates due to the high costs of the procedure. The average rate of multiple pregnancies resulting from IVF in Canada is currently around 30%. An alternative to IVF is IUI. In spite of reported lower success rates of IUI (pregnancy rates per cycle range from 8.7% to 17.1%) it is generally attempted before IVF due to its lower invasiveness and cost. Two major drawbacks of IUI are that it cannot be used in cases of bilateral tubal obstruction and it does not allow much control over the risk of multiple pregnancies compared with IVF. The rate of multiple pregnancies after IUI with COS is estimated to be about 21% to 29%. Ontario Health Insurance Plan Coverage Currently, the Ontario Health Insurance Plan covers the cost of IVF for women with bilaterally blocked Fallopian tubes only, in which case it is funded for 3 cycles, excluding the cost of drugs. The cost of IUI is covered except for preparation of the sperm and drugs used for COS. DIFFUSION OF TECHNOLOGY: According to Canadian Assisted Reproductive Technology Registry data, in 2004 there were 25 infertility clinics across Canada offering IVF and 7,619 IVF cycles performed. In Ontario, there are 13 infertility clinics with about 4,300 IVF cycles performed annually.
ROYAL COMMISSION REPORT ON REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGIES: The 1993 release of the Royal Commission report on reproductive technologies, Proceed With Care, resulted in the withdrawal of most IVF funding in Ontario, where prior to 1994 IVF was fully funded. Recommendations of the Commission to withdraw IVF funding were largely based on findings of the systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before 1990. The review showed IVF effectiveness only in cases of bilateral tubal obstruction. As for nontubal causes of infertility, there was not enough evidence to establish whether IVF was effective or not. Since the field of reproductive technology is constantly evolving, there have been several changes since the publication of the Royal Commission report. These changes include: increased success rates of IVF; introduction of ICSI in the early 1990's as a treatment for male factor infertility; and improved embryo implantation rates allowing for the transfer of a single embryo to avoid multiple pregnancies after IVF. STUDIES AFTER THE ROYAL COMMISSION REPORT: REVIEW STRATEGY THREE SEPARATE LITERATURE REVIEWS WERE CONDUCTED IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS: clinical effectiveness of IVF, cost-effectiveness of IVF, and outcomes of single embryo transfer (SET) in IVF cycles. CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS OF IVF: RCTs or meta-analyses of RCTs that compared live birth rates after IVF versus alternative treatments, where the cause of infertility was clearly stated or it was possible to stratify the outcome by the cause of infertility.COST EFFECTIVENESS OF IVF: All relevant economic studies comparing IVF to alternative methods of treatment were reviewedOUTCOMES OF IVF WITH SET: RCTs or meta-analyses of RCTs that compared live birth rates and multiple birth rates associated with transfer of single versus double embryos.OVID MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, the International Agency for Health Technology Assessment database, and websites of other health technology assessment agencies were searched using specific subject headings and keywords to identify relevant studies.
COMPARATIVE CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS OF IVF: Overall, there is a lack of well composed RCTs in this area and considerable diversity in both definition and measurement of outcomes exists between trials. Many studies used fertility or pregnancy rates instead of live birth rates. Moreover, the denominator for rate calculation varied from study to study (e.g. rates were calculated per cycle started, per cycle completed, per couple, etc...). Nevertheless, few studies of sufficient quality were identified and categorized by the cause of infertility and existing alternatives to IVF. The following are the key findings: A 2005 meta-analysis demonstrated that, in patients with idiopathic infertility, IVF was clearly superior to expectant management, but there were no statistically significant differences in live birth rates between IVF and IUI, nor between IVF and gamete-intra-Fallopian transfer.A subset of data from a 2000 study showed no significant differences in pregnancy rates between IVF and IUI for moderate male factor infertility.In patients with moderate male factor infertility, standard IVF was also compared with ICSI in a 2002 meta-analysis. All studies included in the meta-analysis showed superior fertilization rates with ICSI, and the pooled risk ratio for oocyte fertilization was 1.9 (95% Confidence Interval 1.4-2.5) in favour of ICSI. Two other RCTs in this area published after the 2002 meta-analysis had similar results and further confirmed these findings. There were no RCTs comparing IVF with ICSI in patients with severe male factor infertility, mainly because based on the expert opinion, ICSI might only be an effective treatment for severe male factor infertility. COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF IVF: Five economic evaluations of IVF were found, including one comprehensive systematic review of 57 health economic studies. The studies compared cost-effectiveness of IVF with a number of alternatives such as observation, ovarian stimulation, IUI, tubal surgery, varicocelectomy, etc... The cost-effectiveness of IVF was analyzed separately for different types of infertility. Most of the reviewed studies concluded that due to the high cost, IVF has a less favourable cost-effectiveness profile compared with alternative treatment options. Therefore, IVF was not recommended as the first line of treatment in the majority of cases. The only two exceptions were bilateral tubal obstruction and severe male factor infertility, where an immediate offer of IVF/ICSI might the most cost-effective option. CLINICAL OUTCOMES AFTER SINGLE VERSUS DOUBLE EMBRYO TRANSFER STRATEGIES OF IVF: Since the SET strategy has been more widely adopted in Europe, all RCT outcomes of SET were conducted in European countries. The major study in this area was a large 2005 meta-analysis, followed by two other published RCTs. All of these studies reached similar conclusions: Although a single SET cycle results in lower birth rates than a single double embryo transfer (DET) cycle, the cumulative birth rate after 2 cycles of SET (fresh + frozen-thawed embryos) was comparable to the birth rate after a single DET cycle (~40%).SET was associated with a significant reduction in multiple births compared with DET (0.8% vs. 33.1% respectively in the largest RCT). (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)
本卫生技术政策评估的目的是确定体外受精(IVF)治疗不孕症的临床有效性和成本效益,以及IVF在降低多胎妊娠率方面的作用。
目标人群和病症 不孕症通常定义为在一年规律无保护性交后仍无法受孕,影响8%至16%的育龄夫妇。该病症可能由生殖过程中各个环节的干扰引起。不孕症的主要原因包括精子异常、输卵管阻塞、子宫内膜异位症、排卵障碍和不明原因不孕症。根据病因和患者特征,治疗选择范围从药物治疗到更先进的技术,即辅助生殖技术(ART)。ART包括IVF和与IVF相关的程序,如卵胞浆内单精子注射(ICSI),根据某些定义,还包括宫腔内人工授精(IUI),也称为人工授精。几乎无一例外,ART的初始步骤是控制性卵巢刺激(COS),与自然受孕相比,这会导致ART后多胎妊娠率显著升高。多胎妊娠对母亲和胎儿都有一系列负面后果。母亲的并发症包括妊娠高血压、先兆子痫、羊水过多、妊娠期糖尿病、需要剖宫产的胎位异常、产后出血和产后抑郁症的风险增加。多胎妊娠的婴儿早期死亡、早产和低出生体重的风险显著更高,以及与早产相关的身心残疾。孕产妇和胎儿发病率的增加导致多胎妊娠的围产期和新生儿成本更高,以及由于残疾和对医疗及社会支持需求增加而产生的后续终身成本。
IVF最初是作为一种克服双侧输卵管阻塞的方法而开发的。该程序包括几个步骤:(1)从卵巢中取出女性的卵子;(2)在体外与精子接触并受精;(3)将胚胎培养3至5天;(4)再将其转移回子宫。IVF被认为是当今治疗不孕症最有效的方法之一。根据加拿大辅助生殖技术登记处的数据,加拿大IVF后的平均活产率约为30%,但母亲年龄和不孕症主要原因存在相当大的差异。IVF的一个重要优点是它允许控制移植胚胎的数量。许多欧洲国家在IVF周期中采用的选择性单胚胎移植被证明可以显著降低多胎妊娠的风险,同时保持可接受的出生率。然而,当移植胚胎数量不受限制时,IVF相关的多胎妊娠率与其他涉及卵巢刺激的治疗相似。IVF中多胚胎移植的做法通常是由于该程序成本高昂,为提高成功率而产生的压力所致。目前加拿大IVF导致的多胎妊娠平均率约为30%。IVF的替代方法是IUI。尽管据报道IUI的成功率较低(每个周期的妊娠率在8.7%至17.1%之间),但由于其侵入性较低和成本较低,通常在IVF之前尝试。IUI的两个主要缺点是它不能用于双侧输卵管阻塞的情况,并且与IVF相比,它对多胎妊娠风险的控制能力有限。COS后IUI的多胎妊娠率估计约为21%至29%。安大略省医疗保险计划覆盖范围 目前,安大略省医疗保险计划仅涵盖双侧输卵管阻塞女性的IVF费用,在这种情况下,该费用由政府资助3个周期,不包括药物费用。IUI的费用除精子制备和用于COS的药物外均可报销。
根据加拿大辅助生殖技术登记处的数据,2004年加拿大有25家不孕症诊所提供IVF,共进行了7619个IVF周期。在安大略省,有13家不孕症诊所,每年约进行4300个IVF周期。
皇家生殖技术委员会报告:1993年发布的皇家生殖技术委员会报告《谨慎前行》导致安大略省大部分IVF资金被撤回,在1994年之前IVF在该省是全额资助的。委员会撤回IVF资金的建议主要基于对1990年前发表的随机对照试验(RCT)系统评价的结果。该评价表明IVF仅在双侧输卵管阻塞的情况下有效。至于非输卵管性不孕症原因,没有足够证据确定IVF是否有效。自皇家委员会报告发布以来,生殖技术领域不断发展,出现了一些变化。这些变化包括:IVF成功率提高;20世纪90年代初引入ICSI作为男性因素不孕症的治疗方法;以及胚胎着床率提高,允许移植单个胚胎以避免IVF后的多胎妊娠。
综述策略 在以下领域进行了三项单独的文献综述:IVF的临床有效性、IVF的成本效益以及IVF周期中单胚胎移植(SET)的结果。
IVF的临床有效性:比较IVF与替代治疗后活产率的RCT或RCT的荟萃分析,其中不孕症原因明确说明或可以按不孕症原因对结果进行分层。
IVF的成本效益:审查了所有将IVF与替代治疗方法进行比较的相关经济研究。
IVF采用SET的结果:比较单胚胎与双胚胎移植相关的活产率和多胎出生率的RCT或RCT的荟萃分析。使用特定的主题词和关键词在OVID MEDLINE、MEDLINE In-Process及其他未索引引文、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆、国际卫生技术评估机构数据库以及其他卫生技术评估机构的网站上进行搜索,以识别相关研究。
IVF的比较临床有效性:总体而言,该领域缺乏精心设计的RCT,试验之间在结果的定义和测量方面存在相当大的差异。许多研究使用生育率或妊娠率而非活产率。此外,率计算的分母因研究而异(例如,率是按开始的周期、完成的周期、每对夫妇等计算)。然而,确定了少数质量足够的研究,并按不孕症原因和IVF的现有替代方法进行了分类。以下是主要发现:
一项2005年的荟萃分析表明,在不明原因不孕症患者中,IVF明显优于期待治疗,但IVF与IUI之间的活产率以及IVF与配子输卵管内移植之间的活产率没有统计学显著差异。
2000年一项研究的部分数据显示,在中度男性因素不孕症患者中,IVF与IUI的妊娠率没有显著差异。
在2002年的一项荟萃分析中,还将中度男性因素不孕症患者的标准IVF与ICSI进行了比较。荟萃分析中纳入的所有研究均显示ICSI的受精率更高,卵母细胞受精的合并风险比为1.9(95%置信区间1.4 - 2.5),支持ICSI。2002年荟萃分析后该领域发表的另外两项RCT也有类似结果并进一步证实了这些发现。没有RCT在严重男性因素不孕症患者中比较IVF与ICSI,主要是因为根据专家意见,ICSI可能仅对严重男性因素不孕症有效。
IVF的成本效益:发现了五项IVF的经济评估,包括一项对57项卫生经济研究的全面系统评价。这些研究将IVF的成本效益与多种替代方法进行了比较,如观察、卵巢刺激、IUI、输卵管手术、精索静脉曲张切除术等。针对不同类型的不孕症分别分析了IVF的成本效益。大多数审查研究得出结论,由于成本高昂,与替代治疗选择相比,IVF的成本效益不太理想。因此,在大多数情况下不建议将IVF作为一线治疗方法。仅有的两个例外是双侧输卵管阻塞和严重男性因素不孕症,在这些情况下立即提供IVF/ICSI可能是最具成本效益