Literature DB >> 17544418

Markov modeling of vasectomy reversal and ART for infertility: how do obstructive interval and female partner age influence cost effectiveness?

Michael H Hsieh1, Maxwell V Meng, Paul J Turek.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To apply Markov models to assess the cost effectiveness of the relative impact of obstructive interval and female partner age on fertility using either assisted reproductive technology (ART) or vasectomy reversal, and elucidate the impact of these variables on fertility.
DESIGN: Markov models based on review of published literature and available ART outcome data.
SETTING: University-based clinical practice. PATIENT(S): Simulation runs of 50,000 patients for each analysis. INTERVENTION(S): Varying vasectomy obstructive interval and maternal age. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Cost effectiveness, willingness to pay (WTP), and net health benefit. RESULT(S): Base case analysis showed ART yields a higher pregnancy rate and higher cost than vasectomy reversal. Sensitivity analysis showed female age has a greater effect on cost effectiveness than obstructive interval. At a WTP < $65,000, vasectomy reversal is more cost effective than ART. With increasing WTP, ART is more cost effective over wider windows of female age. CONCLUSION(S): Markov modeling of fertility after vasectomy suggests female age has more impact than vasectomy obstructive interval on cost effectiveness.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17544418     DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.11.199

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fertil Steril        ISSN: 0015-0282            Impact factor:   7.329


  9 in total

Review 1.  Surgical techniques for the management of male infertility.

Authors:  Natalya A Lopushnyan; Thomas J Walsh
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2011-11-28       Impact factor: 3.285

2.  Role of Markov Modeling Approaches to Understand the Impact of Infertility Treatments.

Authors:  Arni S R Srinivasa Rao; Michael P Diamond
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2017-02-12       Impact factor: 3.060

Review 3.  The evolution and refinement of vasoepididymostomy techniques.

Authors:  Peter T Chan
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2012-11-19       Impact factor: 3.285

Review 4.  Surgical treatment of male infertility in the era of intracytoplasmic sperm injection - new insights.

Authors:  Sandro C Esteves; Ricardo Miyaoka; Ashok Agarwal
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 2.365

Review 5.  Evaluating Cost-effectiveness of Interventions That Affect Fertility and Childbearing: How Health Effects Are Measured Matters.

Authors:  Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert; Margaret L Brandeau
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 2.749

6.  Vasectomy and vasectomy reversal: An update.

Authors:  Ranjith Ramasamy; Peter N Schlegel
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2011-01

7.  Vasectomy Reversal must be the first step for a man who had a vasectomy and wants a children from a new marriage? Opinion: Yes.

Authors:  Marcelo Vieira
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2015 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.541

Review 8.  Review of Azoospermia.

Authors:  Matthew Wosnitzer; Marc Goldstein; Matthew P Hardy
Journal:  Spermatogenesis       Date:  2014-03-31

9.  Office-based andrology and male infertility procedures-a cost-effective alternative.

Authors:  Manaf Alom; Matthew Ziegelmann; Josh Savage; Tanner Miest; Tobias S Köhler; Landon Trost
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-08
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.