Altruistic Donation of Surplus Embryos to Known and Unknown Recipients, The Dutch Approach.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that embryo donation can be a successful treatment for infertile couples,
however the willingness of Dutch couples to donate or accept embryos was unknown. The aim of this article is to
describe the protocol and results for altruistic embryo donation of the only embryo bank in the Netherlands.
Materials and Methods: This is a descriptive study. Since 2011, donated cryo-embryos from couples that have undergone
in vitro-fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) treatments, are being stored in our embryo
bank. The majority of the donated embryos were frozen on day 3 or 4 by slow freezing techniques. We perform a
thorough medical and psychological screening of donor couples and recipients, according to the protocol drawn up in
close collaboration with the Dutch Ministry of Health.
Results: Up to June 2021, 54 women have received embryos from our embryo bank, all single embryo transfers.
While the clinical pregnancy rate in 'unknown' embryo donations was relatively high (25.3%), the live birth rate
shows limited success (12.6%), partly due to high pregnancy loss through miscarriage. In known donation procedures,
the recipients tend to undergo more procedures, depending on the number of donated cryo-embryos. Twentyeight
women received embryos from known donors, with a clinical pregnancy rate per embryo transfer of 24%, and
live birth rate of 14%. In total, 82 recipients were granted donated cryo-embryos, twenty had an ongoing pregnancy
(24.4%), nineteen of whom have given birth to a healthy child (23%).
Conclusion: Altruistic embryo donation of embryos appears to be satisfying for the donors, as they are not obliged to destroy
their embryos, but instead help others build a family. Although success rates are still limited, partly due to the relatively high
miscarriage rates and inferior freezing techniques, to this date nineteen out of 82 recipients have given birth to a healthy child.

Intracervical insemination versus intrauterine insemination with cryopreserved donor sperm in the natural cycle: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Is intracervical insemination (ICI) non-inferior to IUI with cryopreserved donor sperm in the natural cycle in terms of live birth? SUMMARY ANSWER: ICI with cryopreserved donor sperm in the natural cycle was inferior to IUI in terms of live birth. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Both ICI and IUI in the natural cycle are performed as first-line treatments in women who are eligible for donor sperm treatment. High-quality data on the effectiveness of ICI versus IUI with cryopreserved donor sperm in the natural cycle in terms of live birth is lacking. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We performed an open-label multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial in the Netherlands and Belgium. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We randomly allocated women who were eligible for donor sperm treatment with cryopreserved donor semen to six cycles of ICI in the natural cycle or six cycles of IUI in the natural cycle. The primary outcome was conception within 8 months after randomization leading to a live birth. Secondary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage and time to conception leading to live birth. We calculated relative risks (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) with 95% CI. Non-inferiority would be shown if the lower limit of the 95% RD CI was <-12%. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Between June 2014 and February 2019, we included 421 women, of whom 211 women were randomly allocated to ICI and 210 to IUI. Of the 211 women allocated to ICI, 2 women were excluded, 126 women completed treatment according to protocol and 75 women did not complete 6 treatment cycles. Of the 210 women allocated to IUI, 3 women were excluded, 140 women completed treatment according to protocol and 62 women did not complete 6 treatment cycles. Mean female age was 34 years (SD ±4) in both interventions. Conception leading to live birth occurred in 51 women (24%) allocated to ICI and in 81 women (39%) allocated to IUI (RR 0.63, 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.84). This corresponds to an absolute RD of -15%; 95% CI: -24% to -6.9%, suggesting inferiority of ICI. ICI also resulted in a lower live birth rate over time (hazard ratio 0.58, 95% CI: 0.41-0.82). Our per-protocol analysis showed that, within the 8 months treatment horizon, 48 women (38%) had live births after ICI and 79 women (56%) had live births after IUI (RR 0.68, 95% CI: 0.52-0.88; RD -18%, 95% CI: -30% to -6%). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study was non-blinded owing to the nature of the interventions. We consider it unlikely that this has introduced performance bias, since pregnancy outcomes are objective outcome measures. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Since ICI in the natural cycle was inferior to IUI in the natural cycle with cryopreserved donor sperm in terms of live birth rate, IUI is the preferred treatment. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This trial received funding from the Dutch Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw project number 837002407). B.W.J.M. is supported by an NHMRC Investigator grant (GNT1176437), reports consultancy for ObsEva and has received research funding from Guerbet, Ferring and Merck. The other authors do not declare a COI. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR4462. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 11 March 2014. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 03 June 2014.

Stakeholders views on the ethical aspects of oocyte banking for third-party assisted reproduction: a qualitative interview study with donors, recipients and professionals.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the moral considerations held by donors, recipients and professionals towards the ethical aspects of the intake and distribution of donor bank oocytes for third-party assisted reproduction? SUMMARY ANSWER: Interviews with oocyte donors, oocyte recipients and professionals demonstrate a protective attitude towards the welfare of the donor and the future child. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The scarcity of donor oocytes challenges the approach towards the many ethical aspects that arise in establishing and operating an oocyte bank for third-party assisted reproduction. Including experiences and moral considerations originating from practice provides useful insight on how to overcome these challenges. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The project was set-up as a qualitative interview study and took place between October 2016 and August 2017. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We conducted 25 semi-structured interviews with professionals engaged in the practice of oocyte banking (n = 10), recipients of donor oocytes (n = 7) and oocyte donors (n = 8). Key themes were formulated by means of a thematic analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Based on the interviews, we formulated four main themes describing stakeholders' views regarding the ethical aspects of the intake and distribution of donor bank oocytes. First, respondents articulated that when selecting donors and recipients, healthcare workers should prevent donors from making a wrong decision and safeguard the future child's well-being by minimizing health risks and selecting recipients based on their parental capabilities. Second, they proposed to provide a reasonable compensation and to increase societal awareness on the scarcity of donor oocytes to diminish barriers for donors. Third, respondents considered the prioritization of recipients in case of scarcity a difficult choice, because they are all dependent on donor oocytes to fulfil their wish for a child. They emphasized that treatment attempts should be limited, but at least include one embryo transfer. Fourth and finally, the importance of good governance of oocyte banks was mentioned, including a homogenous policy and the facilitation of exchange of experiences between oocyte banks. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The possibility of selection bias exists, because we interviewed donors and recipients who were selected according to the criteria currently employed in the clinics. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Respondents' moral considerations regarding the ethical aspects of the intake and distribution of donor oocytes demonstrate a protective attitude towards the welfare of the donor and the future child. At the same time, respondents also questioned whether such a (highly) protective attitude was justified. This finding may indicate there is room for reconsidering strategies for the collection and distribution of donor bank oocytes. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded by ZonMw: The Dutch Organization for Health Research and Development (Grant number 70-73000-98-200). A.M.E.B. and B.C.J.M.F. are the initiators of the UMC Utrecht oocyte bank. J.J.P.M.P. is the director of the MCK Fertility Centre. IMC is working as a gynaecologist at the AMC Amsterdam oocyte bank. During the most recent 5-year period, BCJM Fauser has received fees or grant support from the following organizations (in alphabetic order): Actavis/Watson/Uteron, Controversies in Obstetrics & Gynaecologist (COGI), Dutch Heart Foundation, Dutch Medical Research Counsel (ZonMW), Euroscreen/Ogeda, Ferring, London Womens Clinic (LWC), Merck Serono (GFI), Myovant, Netherland Genomic Initiative (NGI), OvaScience, Pantharei Bioscience, PregLem/Gedeon Richter/Finox, Reproductive Biomedicine Online (RBMO), Roche, Teva and World Health Organization (WHO). The authors have no further competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Experts' opinions on the benefit of an incidental prenatal diagnosis of sex chromosomal aneuploidy: a qualitative interview survey.

OBJECTIVE: Incidental findings in prenatal diagnostic testing may or may not have clear prognostic significance for the phenotype. We studied experts' opinions of the benefit and disadvantage of an incidental prenatal diagnosis of a sex chromosomal aneuploidy (SCA). METHODS: We interviewed 16 experts in the field of counseling and treatment of people with SCA and asked 13 clinical geneticists and genetic associates about the clinical relevance of an incidental prenatal diagnosis of SCA. RESULTS: Most of the experts and clinical geneticists (87.5% and 76.9%, respectively) stated that an incidental prenatal diagnosis of SCA was a benefit for the child and the parents. They acknowledged the possibility of parental decisions to terminate pregnancy. Expert options in screening, training, and treatment of health, behavior, and fertility problems increase with an early diagnosis of SCA. CONCLUSION: Most experts favored an incidental prenatal diagnosis of SCA despite the complex counseling issues and their acknowledgment of possible parental decisions to terminate pregnancy. They believed the benefits greatly outweigh the disadvantages.

Incidental prenatal diagnosis of sex chromosome aneuploidies: health, behavior, and fertility.

Objective. To assess the diagnostic relevance of incidental prenatal findings of sex chromosome aneuploidies. Methods. We searched with medical subject headings (MeSHs) and keywords in Medline and the Cochrane Library and systematically screened publications on postnatally diagnosed sex chromosomal aneuploidies from 2006 to 2011 as well as publications on incidentally prenatally diagnosed sex chromosomal aneuploidies from 1980 to 2011. Results. Postnatally diagnosed sex chromosomal aneuploidies demonstrated three clinical relevant domains of abnormality: physical (22-100%), behavior (0-56%), and reproductive health (47-100%), while incidentally prenatally diagnosed sex chromosomal aneuploidies demonstrated, respectively, 0-33%, 0-40%, and 0-36%. Conclusion. In the literature incidental prenatal diagnosis of sex chromosomal aneuploidies is associated with normal to mildly affected phenotypes. This contrasts sharply with those of postnatally diagnosed sex chromosomal aneuploidies and highlights the importance of this ascertainment bias towards the prognostic value of diagnosis of fetal sex chromosomal aneuploidies. This observation should be taken into account, especially when considering excluding the sex chromosomes in invasive prenatal testing using Rapid Aneuploidy Detection.

Parents' perspectives on the unforeseen finding of a fetal sex chromosomal aneuploidy.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the parental perspectives of being confronted with an unforeseen fetal sex chromosomal aneuploidy (SCA), in light of the fact that this accidental finding is avoidable by rapid aneuploidy detection (RAD). METHODS: Exploratory qualitative interview study. We conducted 16 semi-structured interviews with parents who decided to continue pregnancy after the unforeseen finding of a fetal SCA. RESULTS: The communication of the unforeseen finding of SCA; the informed decision-making process concerning the pregnancy follow-up and the child and its future were the extracted themes. Parents were not prepared to accidental findings in routine prenatal diagnostics. All started an unguided search on the Internet. It is not at all clear whether parents have preference for an RAD test with X and Y probes Parents were satisfied with the post-test professional information they received to make an informed decision, whereas after birth questions still remained to be answered. CONCLUSION: Parents' perspectives may serve as major contributors to research on the question whether or not the X and Y probes should be standard included for purposes of RAD. The fact that RAD has the possibility to avoid accidental findings of SCAs, brings up the question whether any benefits outweigh the potential harms.