Preservation of future fertility in pediatric patients with cancer.

The cure rate for childhood and adolescent patients with cancer has currently reached almost 80% and protecting future fertility and thereby promoting quality of life have become a major challenge in the care of these patients (Bioethics Law, 2004). Age, sex and associated treatments influence the risk of future subfertility. Certain chemotherapies (particularly alkylating agents) and radiotherapy fields that include the gonads or hypothalamopituitary axis may negatively impact the future fertility of patients. Evaluation of the gonadotoxic potential of therapeutic measures and the utilization of appropriate methods to preserve fertility require the combined efforts of a multidisciplinary team that includes pediatric oncologists, radiotherapists, surgeons, reproductive physicians and biologists and psychologists. Techniques for fertility preservation vary depending on the age of the child and range from surgical transposition of the gonads for pelvic radiotherapy to cryopreservation of the ovary or testicle in case of sterilizing chemotherapy. While scientists still do not yet fully understand the maturation of immature germ cells, these children will be seeking the assistance of Medically Assisted Procreation (MAP) in 20-30 years. In the meanwhile, it is to be hoped that many more advances will be achieved in the utilization of harvested germinal tissue.

Meso-Rex bypass for extrahepatic portal vein obstruction in children.

BACKGROUND: Meso-Rex bypass (MRB) and portosystemic surgical shunt (PSS) are both used to treat extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO) in children. The aim of this study was to analyse the outcome of MRB and PSS to select patients who could benefit from a prophylactic MRB. METHODS: This single-centre retrospective study of children who underwent either MRB or PSS for EHPVO was conducted between 1996 and 2010. Details of patient demographics and preoperative evaluation were collected. Success rates, defined as shunt patency after a minimum of 6 months and clearance of varices or symptoms, were compared. Determinants of outcomes were explored. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients underwent a MRB or PSS. Median (interquartile range, i.q.r.) age at surgery was 6.6 (4.0-10.6) years. Twenty-four patients (35 per cent) had had a neonatal umbilical catheter (NUC) placed previously and 47 (68 per cent) had experienced an upper gastrointestinal bleed. Imaging assessment of the intrahepatic left portal vein was considered favourable in 40 patients. Of 43 MRBs attempted, 11 failed during surgery and four patients had persistent thrombosis after a median of 55 (i.q.r. 18-107) months. The success rate of MRB was 60 per cent (26 of 43) compared with 100 per cent (26 of 26) for PSS (P < 0.001). It was lower among patients in whom a NUC had been used (2 of 10 versus 24 of 33; P = 0.004), for procedures undertaken early in the series (6 of 16 versus 20 of 27; P = 0.020) and when the imaging pattern was unfavourable (0 of 5 versus 26 of 38; P = 0.006). On multivariable analysis, only a previous history of NUC predicted failure (P = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Prophylactic MRB seems a good treatment option for EHPVO in children, but should be done only by an experienced team in patients with favourable imaging and without a previous history of NUC.