National survey of donor-conceived individuals who requested information about their sperm donor-experiences from 17 years of identity releases in Sweden.

STUDY QUESTION: What characterizes the group of donor-conceived (DC) individuals who request information about their identity-release sperm donor in Sweden, and what are their experiences of disclosure, information receipt and donor contact? SUMMARY ANSWER: Following three decades of identity-release donation in Sweden, few DC individuals have requested donor information with varying experiences of information receipt and donor contact. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In 1985, Sweden was the first country worldwide to enact legislation that gave DC individuals the right to obtain identifying information about their donor. Since then, identity-release gamete donation has become available in many countries but there is limited knowledge about the individuals who request donor information. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A nation-wide cross-sectional survey study was performed at all seven University hospitals that provided donation treatment in Sweden during 1985-2002. During this period only donor insemination to heterosexual couples was permitted. Inclusion criteria were being 18 years of age or older, conceived with donor sperm and having requested information about the donor by December 2020. Recruitment was performed during 2016-2020. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: A total of 60 individuals had requested information about their donor. Of these, 53 were approached and 40 individuals, representing 34 families, accepted study participation (75% response rate). Participants completed a postal survey with the WHO-10 well-being index and study-specific questions about experiences of disclosure, motivations for requesting donor information, receipt of information, as well as intentions and experiences of donor contact. Independent t-test and chi-square tests were used to compare ratings of participants with early and late disclosure. MAIN RESULTS AND ROLE OF CHANCE: Of ∼900 DC individuals who had reached adult age, a total of 60 (≈7%) had requested information about the donor. Most of the 40 study participants (78%) made their requests within 2 years after reaching 18 years of age, or following disclosure at later ages (up to 32 years). Several participants had adult DC siblings in the family who had not requested any donor information. All except five participants received identifying information about the donor from the clinic. However, some donors had died or lacked contact information. Among those participants who were able to contact their donor, 41% had done so at the time of the study, while a third of the participants were unsure about potential contact. Several had met the donor in person and a few were in regular contact. About half of the participants had been informed about their donor conception in adolescence or adulthood (age 12-32), and there were significant differences between participants based on age at disclosure. Compared to those with early disclosure, participants with late disclosure were significantly more likely to be dissatisfied with the timing of their disclosure (P = 0.021), to react with negative emotions (P < 0.001), and to subsequently contact the donor (P = 0.047). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The limited population available for inclusion resulted in a small sample size, despite a high response rate. In addition, men's lower participation rate must be taken into consideration when interpreting the results. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The small number of individuals requesting information about their identity-release sperm donor is surprising. While not all DC individuals appear to be interested in donor information, it is reasonable to assume that some are unaware of their donor conception and thus unable to make informed decisions regarding their genetic origins. During the coming years, young women and men in many countries will become eligible to access identifying information about their donor. In order to meet the needs of these individuals, and to support positive outcomes for all involved parties, it is essential that adequate protocols and resources are developed. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST: Financial support from The Swedish Research Council. There are no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Gamete donors' satisfaction; gender differences and similarities among oocyte and sperm donors in a national sample.

OBJECTIVE: To explore oocyte and sperm donors' emotional stress, experiences of care and satisfaction after donation. DESIGN: Prospective multicenter study. SETTINGS: All fertility clinics performing gamete donation in Sweden during the period 2005 to 2008. POPULATION: Of 220 eligible oocyte donors who were approached, 181 agreed to complete the first questionnaire and 165 completed the second questionnaire 2 months after oocyte donation. Of 156 eligible sperm donors 119 accepted to complete the first questionnaire before donation. Eighty-nine participants completed the second questionnaire 2 months after sperm donation. METHODS: Standardized and study-specific questionnaires. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Satisfaction with the donation, respondents' mental health and overall care. RESULTS: A larger percentage of sperm donors (97.8%) were satisfied with their overall experience of being a donor than oocyte donors (85.9%, p = 0.003). Some oocyte and sperm donors did not receive sufficient information about practical issues (9.1% and 13.5%, respectively) and future consequences (12.8% and 3.4%, respectively, p = 0.014). The donors' symptoms of anxiety and depression did not show any differences in relation to negative or positive perceptions of satisfaction. The donors who did not indicate ambivalence before treatment were on average almost five times more satisfied compared with those who did indicate ambivalence (odds ratio 4.71; 95% CI 1.34-16.51). CONCLUSIONS: Most donors were satisfied with their contribution after the donation. Oocyte and sperm donors who expressed ambivalence before donation were less satisfied after donation. In vitro fertilization staff fulfilled most of the donors' needs for information and care.

Gamete donors' motivation in a Swedish national sample: is there any ambivalence? A descriptive study.

OBJECTIVE: To study donors' motivation and ambivalence before donation of gametes. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Seven Swedish university hospital clinics. Sample. Of the 220 eligible oocyte donors and 156 eligible sperm donors who were approached, 181 (82%) oocyte donors and 119 (76%) sperm donors agreed to participate. METHODS: Gamete donors completed a questionnaire in the clinic prior to the donation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Motives and ambivalence towards donation. RESULTS: In general, gamete donors donated for altruistic reasons (95%). A greater percentage of oocyte than sperm donors had a personal experience of biological children, which motivated them to donate (65 vs. 32%). A greater percentage of sperm donors compared with oocyte donors were curious about their own fertility (24 vs. 9%), and they also believed that they were contributing what they regarded as their own good genes to other couples (45 vs. 20%). Prior to donation, potential sperm donors were more ambivalent towards donating than were oocyte donors (39 and 21%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The motives to donate gametes are mainly altruistic. We conclude that men and women differ in their view towards donating gametes. Sperm donors had a higher degree of ambivalent feelings towards donation than oocyte donors.

Intraovarian blood flow measured with color doppler ultrasonography inversely correlates with vascular density in the human corpus luteum of the menstrual cycle.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the morphologic characteristics underlying the ultrasonographic appearance and blood flow dynamics in the human corpus luteum (CL) of the menstrual cycle. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Umeå University Hospital, Umeå, Sweden. PATIENT(S): Twenty-six otherwise healthy women with proven fertility and a history of regular menstrual cycles, scheduled for elective hysterectomy or tubal sterilization. INTERVENTION(S): An ovulatory LH rise in urine was established and the CL age was determined according to the day after the LH rise. Before surgery, a standardized ultrasonographic examination of the CL, including B-mode and color Doppler ultrasonography measurements, was performed. Upon commencing the minilaparotomy, the CL was excised and measured using a digital slide-caliper. The volume density (percentage of CL volume occupied by blood vessels) of factor VIII-related antigen immunostained endothelial cells was determined. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Pulsatility index obtained from intraovarian blood vessels supplying the CL and volume density of blood vessels in CL tissue. The CL maximal and minimal outer and inner dimensions were measured in vivo by ultrasonography and ex vivo by a digital slide caliper. RESULT(S): A statistically significant decrease of blood vessel density and an increased resistance to blood flow, as indicated by pulsatility index, was established during the course of corpus luteum development. An inverse correlation between pulsatility index and volume density of blood vessels was found. A high degree of agreement between ultrasonographic and anatomic measurements of surgically removed CL was found. CONCLUSION(S): Transvaginal ultrasonography in combination with intraovarian color Doppler flow measurements is a simple and reliable method to evaluate the size and vascularization of the human CL.