Navigating the complex landscape of reproductive strategies for men with Robertsonian translocations, this investigative study rigorously examined the cost-effectiveness of different conception approaches. As fertility concerns become increasingly prominent, especially in those with genetic predispositions, understanding these strategic options not only aids potential parents in making informed decisions but also optimizes potential fertility outcomes and economic investments. Through a comprehensive economic assessment, fertility intentions and medical interventions blend, providing a crucial framework for evaluating options and outcomes.
Methodology and Comparative Analysis
Researchers implemented a model using a Markov process, which analyzed one year of clinical care across three reproductive strategies: in vitro fertilization (IVF) combined with preimplantation genetic testing for structural rearrangements (PGT-SR), intrauterine insemination with frozen donor sperm, and natural conception. The analysis accounted for possible delays due to adverse outcomes, examining up to three cycles of IVF, six cycles of intrauterine insemination, and twelve attempts of natural conception.
Key Findings and Economic Impact
Compared to natural conception, both donor sperm and IVF PGT-SR strategies led to a notable increase in live births while reducing occurrences of miscarriages, stillbirths, Trisomy 13 diagnoses, terminations, and neonatal deaths. However, these benefits come with heightened costs. Notably, donor sperm presented a cost-effective alternative with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $2,019 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), while IVF PGT-SR was $8,469 per QALY compared to natural conception.
– Both donor sperm and IVF PGT-SR enhance birth outcomes compared to natural conception.
– Donor sperm emerges as a cost-saving solution at $2,019 per QALY.
– The economic feasibility of IVF PGT-SR hinges on personal preference for biological progeny.
Individuals who prioritize biological offspring find IVF PGT-SR justifiable in terms of costs over donor sperm, especially when perceived utility of non-biological offspring falls below 0.99. As reproductive technologies and genetic insights advance, candidates must weigh these elements intricately. Cost-effective options evolve alongside personal and financial considerations influencing such life-altering choices.
For men with the common 13;14 Robertsonian translocation, pursuing donor sperm offers a balance of improved fertility outcomes and cost-effectiveness, making it an attractive option. Evaluating the integration of genetic testing within assisted reproductive technologies highlights the pivotal role of patient preferences, particularly where biological connections are significant. Fertility clinics and healthcare providers can leverage these findings to guide patients more effectively, fostering informed choices aligned with both personal desires and economic capabilities.
This article has been prepared with the assistance of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more details, please refer to our Terms and Conditions. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author.
