Cost and efficacy comparison of in vitro fertilization and tubal anastomosis for women after tubal ligation

Lauren B. Messinger, Connie E. Alford, John M. Csokmay, Melinda B. Henne, Sunni L. Mumford, James H. Segars, Alicia Y. Armstrong

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective To compare cost and efficacy of tubal anastomosis to in vitro fertilization (IVF) in women who desired fertility after a tubal ligation. Design Cost-effectiveness analysis. Setting Not applicable. Patient(s) Not applicable. Intervention(s) Not applicable. Main Outcome Measure(s) Cost per ongoing pregnancy. Result(s) Cost per ongoing pregnancy for women after tubal anastomosis ranged from $16,446 to $223,482 (2014 USD), whereas IVF ranged from $32,902 to $111,679 (2014 USD). Across maternal age groups <35 and 35-40, years tubal anastomosis was more cost effective than IVF for ongoing pregnancy. Sensitivity analyses validated these findings across a wide range of ongoing pregnancy probabilities as well as costs per procedure. Conclusion(s) Tubal anastomosis was the most cost-effective approach for most women less than 41 years of age, whereas IVF was the most cost-effective approach for women aged ≥41 years who desired fertility after tubal ligation. A model was created that can be modified based on cost and success rates in individual clinics for improved patient counseling.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)32-38.e4
JournalFertility and sterility
Volume104
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2015

Keywords

  • In vitro fertilization (IVF)
  • bilateral tubal anastomosis (BTA)
  • cost effectiveness
  • decision tree
  • tubal reversal

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Cost and efficacy comparison of in vitro fertilization and tubal anastomosis for women after tubal ligation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this