Abstract
Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of planned oocyte cryopreservation (OC) as a strategy for delayed childbearing to achieve 1 or 2 live births (LB) compared with in vitro fertilization (IVF) and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) at advanced reproductive age. Design: Decision tree model with sensitivity analyses using data from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinical Outcome Reporting System and other clinical sources. Patient(s): A data-driven simulated cohort of patients desiring delayed childbearing with an ideal family size of 1 or 2 LB. Main Outcome Measure(s): Probability of achieving R1 or 2 LB, average and maximum cost per patient, cost per percentage point increase in chance of LB, and population-level cost/LB. Result(s): For those desiring 1 LB, planned OC at age 33 with warming at age 43 decreased the average total cost per patient from $62,308 to $30,333 and increased the likelihood of LB from 50% to 73% when compared with no OC with up to 3 cycles of IVF/ PGT-A at age 43. For those desiring 2 LB, 2 cycles of OC at age 33 and warming at age 40 yielded the lowest cost per patient and highest likelihood of achieving 2 LB ($51,250 and 77%, respectively) when compared withpursuing only 1 cycle of OC ($75,373 and 61%, respectively), no OC and IVF/PGT-A with embryo banking ($79,728 and 48%, respectively), or no OC and IVF/PGT-A without embryo banking ($79,057 and 19%, respectively). Sensitivity analyses showed that OC remained cost-effective across a wide range of ages at cryopreservation. For 1 LB, OC achieved the highest likelihood of success when pursued before age 32 and remained more effective than IVF/PGT-A when pursued before age 39, and for 2 LB, 2 cycles of OC achieved the highest likelihood of success when pursued before age 31 and remained more effective than IVF/PGT-A when pursued before age 39. Conclusion(s): Among patients planning to postpone childbearing, OC is cost-effective and increases the odds of achieving 1 or 2 LB when compared with IVF/PGT-A at a more advanced reproductive age. (Fertil Sterile 2022;118:875-84. (c) 2022 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.) El resumen esta disponible en Espanol al final del articulo.
