Pregnancy outcomes in women with primary ovarian insufficiency in assisted reproductive technology therapy: a retrospective study.

Purpose: This study aims to retrospectively estimate cumulative reproductive outcomes in women with primary ovarian insufficiency (POI) in assisted reproductive technology (ART) therapy. Methods: A total of 139 patients diagnosed with POI were reviewed in this study. Firstly, they were divided into two groups according to oocyte origin: using their own oocytes (OG group) or accepting oocyte donations (OD I group). Secondly, the patients were split depending on the pregnancy outcome. In the OG group, nine patients decided to use others' oocytes after a failure of attempting to use their own, and this population was the oocyte donation II group (OD II group). Results: There were 88 patients who used their own oocytes, while 51 patients accepted oocyte donations. In the OG group, there are only 10 (7.2%) patients who got pregnant, and patients in the OD group had worse hormone levels (FSH 71.37 ± 4.18 vs. 43.98 ± 2.53, AMH 0.06 ± 0.04 vs. 1.15 ± 0.15, and AFC 0.10 ± 0.06 vs. 1.15 ± 0.15) and more years of infertility (5.04 ± 0.48 vs. 3.82 ± 0.30), which explained why they choose oocyte donation. In all the three groups, baseline characteristics were comparable between pregnant women and non-pregnant women. Of the 10 pregnant patients in the OG group, four of them used luteal-phase short-acting long protocol and had pregnancies successfully in their first cycles. Conclusion: Ovarian stimulation in POI women requires more cost and time. For those with a stronger desire to have genetic offspring, luteal-phase short-acting long protocol may help them obtain pregnancy rapidly.

Mycoplasma hominis peritonitis after oocyte donation.

We report the case of a young, immunocompetent, non-pregnant woman diagnosed with acute abdomen 3 weeks after an ultrasound-guided transvaginal oocyte retrieval (TVOR). Peritoneal fluid, obtained during exploratory laparoscopy, yielded Mycoplasma hominis as the sole pathogen. The patient's symptoms and signs improved after 24-hour treatment with intravenous clindamycin, ampicillin and gentamycin. Complete resolution was achieved with oral doxycycline for 14 days.

Addressing Privacy Concerns Surrounding Oocyte Donation in the United States: Gone With Anonymity.

Oocyte donation has greatly expanded in the past several decades since the first procedure was performed in 1983. According to the Centers for Disease Control, the number of cycles using donor oocytes increased from 18,011 cycles in 2010 to 27,131 cycles in 2019. Oocyte donation has become an important reproductive option for women with diminished ovarian reserve, recurrent failed in vitro fertilization, or heritable genetic conditions. It is also particularly important for single men, same-sex male couples, and men with a transgender woman partner. More recently, societal changes accompanying the expansion of social media and broader access to direct-to-consumer DNA testing have raised concerns about privacy and anonymity. In this article, we review two specific aspects of donor privacy: privacy related to personal identifiers provided by clinics or donor egg bank websites and privacy related to direct-to-consumer genetic testing. We also provide clinical recommendations specific to the United States for working with oocyte donors and donor oocyte recipients.

What importance do donors and recipients attribute to the nuclear DNA-related genetic heritage of oocyte donation?

STUDY QUESTION: How do oocyte donors and recipients perceive the genetic link related to the transfer of nuclear DNA between donors and offspring? SUMMARY ANSWER: Whether they are donors or recipients, individuals attach great importance to the transmission of their genetic heritage, since 94.5% would opt for the pronuclear transfer method to preserve this genetic link in the context of oocyte donation. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Since 1983, the use of oocyte donation has increased worldwide. Performed in France since the late 1980s and initially offered to women with premature ovarian insufficiency, its indications have progressively expanded and now it is proposed in many indications to prevent the transmission of genetically inherited diseases. This has resulted in an increase in the waiting time for access to oocyte donation due to the difficulty in recruiting oocyte donors in French ART centres. Several articles have discussed how to fairly distribute donor oocytes to couples, but few have interviewed women in the general population to record their feelings about oocyte donation, as either the donor or recipient and the importance given to the genetic link between the oocyte donors and the children born. Mitochondrial replacement therapy (MRT) is a technique originally developed for women at risk of transmitting a mitochondrial DNA mutation. Recently, MRT has been considered for embryo arrest and oocyte rejuvenation as it could help females to reproduce with their own genetic material through the transfer of their oocyte nucleus into a healthy donor oocyte cytoplasm. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We conducted an opinion survey from January 2021 to December 2021, during which 1956 women completed the questionnaire. Thirteen participants were excluded from the analysis due to incomplete responses to all the questions. Consequently, 1943 women were included in the study. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We specifically developed a questionnaire for this study, which was created and distributed using the Drag'n Survey® software. The questionnaire consisted of 21 items presented alongside a video created with whiteboard animation software. The aim was to analyse whether certain factors, such as age, education level, marital status, number of children, use of ART for pregnancy, video viewing, and knowledge about oocyte donation, were associated with feelings towards oocyte donation, by using a univariate conditional logistic regression model. This statistical method was also used to assess whether women would be more inclined to consider oocyte donation with the pronuclear transfer technique rather than the whole oocyte donation. All parameters found to be statistically significant in the univariate analysis were subsequently tested in a multivariate model using logistic regression. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Most women were concerned about the biological genetic contribution of the donated oocyte (94.8%). The most common reason for a women's reluctance to donate their oocytes was their unwillingness to pass on their genetic material (33.3%). Nearly 70% of women who were initially hesitant to donate their oocytes indicated that they would reconsider their decision if the oocyte donation was conducted using donated cytoplasm and the pronuclear transfer technique. Concomitantly, >75% of the respondents mentioned that it would be easier to receive a cytoplasm donation. The largest proportion of the population surveyed (94.5%) expressed their support for its legalization. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: In this study, a substantial portion of the responses came from individuals with medical or paramedical backgrounds, potentially introducing a recruitment bias among potential donors. The rate of missing responses to the question regarding the desire to become an oocyte donor was 13.6%, while the question about becoming an oocyte cytoplasm donor had a missing response rate of 23%. These missing responses may introduce a bias in the interpretation of the data. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study was the first to demonstrate that, for the French population studied, the combination of oocyte cytoplasm donation with pronuclear transfer could offer a promising approach to enhance the acceptance of oocyte donation for both the donor and the recipient. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No external funding was used for this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

New recommendations for informing patients and gamete donors in assisted reproduction.

The number of cycles of assisted reproduction using donor body parts is increasing significantly. In Europe alone, around one hundred thousand children are born each year who have some relationship to three or more parents. The European expert guarantor European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology therefore issued a recommendation in 2022 to inform donors, recipients and children born in this way. Our article analyses developments in this area and proposes a solution for the Czech Republic. It is necessary for providers to immediately respond to the fact that the anonymity of donation can no longer be guaranteed, and to adapt the content of consultations and informed consents of potential donors and applicants accordingly. Legislation then has two possible solutions: first to adopt a system of "polyparenthoods" or second to fundamentally limit donation cycles.

Should a gamete bank verify the non-medical information provided by a donor?

Over the years, cases of fraud have been discovered where donors have been lying about their characteristics. The question raised by such cases is what the responsibility of the gamete bank is for the non-medical information provided by the donor. The problem is that extended donor profiles contain a large amount of information about different aspects of the donor's life and that not all this information can be verified or is worth verifying. Two cases are scrutinized in more detail: education and criminal record. The proposed solution is to split the donor information into a verified and a non-verified part with the non-verified part falling under the responsibility of the donor. The question of what information should be included in the verified part of the donor profile is still open.

Live Birth After Oocyte Donation In Vitro Fertilization Cycles in Women With Endometriosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Although multiple mechanisms have been proposed to explain the infertility related to endometriosis, there are no conclusive data on the association of endometriosis with endometrial receptivity. The oocyte donation model in assisted reproduction technology (ART) cycles can clarify this issue. Objective: To explore the association of a history of endometriosis with ART outcomes in recipients of oocyte donation. Data Sources: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, electronic databases were searched from inception until August 31, 2023, using combinations of relevant keywords. Moreover, we retrieved data from the databases of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) in the US and the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA) in the United Kingdom. Study Selection: Observational studies were included if they investigated the impact of endometriosis on ART outcomes with donor oocytes. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Publicly available data related to ART from various sources were gathered, and a retrospective aggregate and nonaggregate analysis using registries of in vitro fertilization cycles with oocyte or embryo donation was conducted. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was live birth rate (LBR) following oocyte donor cycles. The effect measures of comparisons between groups are presented as odds ratios (ORs) with a 95% CI. Results: This study analyzed 7212 oocyte donation cycles from 4 studies for the meta-analysis, along with 162 082 cycles from 2 registries (137 182 from SART and 24 900 from HFEA). No significant differences between the groups were observed in the meta-analysis of published data after adjusting for confounding factors (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.19-1.57). A statistically significant lower LBR was identified in women with endometriosis when analyzing the aggregate data from SART and HFEA databases (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.81-0.97). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found a modest decrease in LBR among women with a history of endometriosis, although only results from the pooled analysis of registry data and not those from the meta-analysis reached statistical significance. These findings suggest that a marginal impairment of uterine receptivity may contribute to infertility mechanisms in women affected by endometriosis.

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing and the changing landscape of gamete donor conception: key issues for practitioners and stakeholders.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What effect does direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTCGT) have on information finding and sharing in relation to gamete donor conception? DESIGN: This study used in-depth qualitative interviews with parents through donor conception, donors, the relatives of donors and donor-conceived people who have used, or considered using, DTCGT. Interviews were conducted between September 2021 and February 2023. Sixty people defined themselves as having been affected by donor conception and DTCGT. Fifty-seven of these were resident in the UK at the time of interview. The final sample included 19 (spermatozoa, egg or embryo) donors, 25 donor-conceived people, 20 parents through donor conception and two relatives of donors. Five participants occupied more than one of these roles. RESULTS: The rise of DTCGT is affecting how information about donor conception is managed: it shifts patterns of knowledge about donor conception; increases flexibility regarding the age of access to information about donor relatives; can lead to a growing role for non-professionals, including wider family members, in gatekeeping information about donor conception; accentuates the effect of donor conception for donors' and the relatives of donor-conceived people; and shapes, and is shaped, by the formal regulatory donor information management systems. CONCLUSION: Fertility professionals should inform people using, or considering, donor conception, or (potential) donors, about the different ways DTCGT can affect sharing information about donor conception. Support is needed for those affected by these changes.

Optimal antimüllerian hormone levels in oocyte donors: a national database analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To study the relationship between high antimüllerian hormone (AMH) levels in oocyte donors and embryo development and pregnancy outcomes among donor oocyte recipients. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Donor Egg Bank Database. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing in vitro fertilization using vitrified donor oocytes from 35 in vitro fertilization centers in the United States between 2013 and 2021. For each recipient, the first oocyte lot that was received with a planned insemination and embryo transfer (ET) was included. INTERVENTION: Oocyte donor-recipient cycles. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR) per ET. RESULTS: A total of 3,871 donor oocyte-recipient thaw cycles were analyzed. On the basis of donor AMH serum concentration, cycles were stratified into the high AMH group (AMH ≥5 ng/mL; n = 1,821) and the referent group (AMH <5 ng/mL; n = 2,050). Generalized estimating equation models were used to account for donors that contributed more than one lot of oocytes. The number of usable embryos per lot (median [interquartile range]) was significantly increased in the high AMH group (2 [2-4]) compared with the referent group (2 [1-3]) (relative risk [RR] 1.06; confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.12). Among recipients with a planned ET, there was no difference in OPR between the high AMH group (45.4%) and the referent group (43.5%) (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.94-1.15). Among preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy cycles, the embryo euploidy rate per biopsy was similar at 66.7% (50%-100%) in both groups (RR 1.04; CI 0.92-1.17). The OPR per euploid ET among patients who used preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy was also comparable, at 52% in the high AMH group and 54.1% in the referent group (RR 0.95; CI 0.74-1.23). CONCLUSION: This large national database study observed that there was no association between a high level of AMH (≥5 ng/mL) in oocyte donors and an OPR in the recipient after the first ET. On the basis of these findings, recipients and physicians can be reassured that oocyte donors with a high AMH level can be expected to produce outcomes that are at least as good as donors with an AMH level (<5 ng/mL).

Searching for and making genetic connections: recommendations for practice from donor conceived adults in the UK.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the support needs of donor conceived individuals who are searching for or open to matching with genetic connections? DESIGN: A total of 88 donor conceived adults in the UK participated in an online survey open between January and August 2022. Participants were asked about their level of awareness of current resource provision, recommendations for resources to support the process of searching for genetic connections, and recommendations for resources to support with feelings about searching for or being found by genetic connections. RESULTS: Participants were found to have varying levels of awareness of the resources available to them, with 39% describing themselves as aware, 41% as partly aware and 20% as unaware. Their recommendations for practical and emotional resources also varied. The most recommended resources for practical support were DNA testing and changes to UK law. The most recommended resources for emotional support were counselling and peer and other support groups. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of legal and technological changes such as direct-to-consumer DNA testing and the legal transition to identifiable donation may be felt by donor conceived individuals irrespective of their year of birth. The wishes of donor conceived individuals for different support resources should be borne in mind by practitioners, regulatory bodies, and policy makers going forward.

Why it is important that we understand the information that gamete donors provide about themselves to recipients.

A personal description and goodwill message is often the only form of communication a gamete recipient receives from the donor. However, the nature of the information gamete donors leave for recipients is not well understood. This Viewpoint article discusses a recent study published in this journal that makes a significant contribution to our understanding of this area of research and raises important questions for research going forward.

Random-start ovarian stimulation in an oocyte donation programme: a large, single-centre, experience.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Do live birth rates differ between recipients matched with donors using conventional ovarian stimulation compared with those using random-start protocols? DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of 891 ovarian stimulations in egg donors (January-December 2018) and clinical outcomes in matched recipients (n = 935). Donors commenced ovarian stimulation on day 1-3 of the menstrual cycle (n = 223) or in the mid/late-follicular (n = 388) or luteal phase (n = 280) under a conventional antagonist protocol. Live birth rate of matched recipients was the main outcome. RESULTS: Duration of stimulation and total gonadotrophin dose were comparable between conventional versus random-start groups. The number of collected eggs were similar (17.6 ± 8.8 versus 17.2 ± 8.5, P = 0.6, respectively). Sub-group analysis showed that stimulation length (10.2 ± 1.8 versus 9.8 ± 1.7 versus 10.4 ± 1.7, P < 0.001) and gonadotrophin consumption (2041.5 ± 645.3 versus 2003.2 ± 647.3 versus 2158.2 ± 685.7 IU, P = 0.01) differed significantly between the conventional, mid/late follicular and luteal phase groups, respectively. In matched recipients receiving fresh oocytes and undergoing fresh embryo transfer, the biochemical pregnancy (63.8% and 63.3%; P = 0.9), clinical pregnancy (54.6% and 56.1%; P = 0.8) and live birth rates (47.7% and 46.6%; P = 0.7) per embryo-transfer were similar between conventional versus random groups. Similar results were obtained in recipients receiving vitrified eggs. Euploidy rate was also comparable. CONCLUSIONS: No notable variations were found in clinical outcomes using oocytes obtained from random-start protocols and those proceeding from conventional ovarian stimulation in oocyte donation treatments. Luteal-phase stimulation seems to require longer stimulation and higher FSH consumption. Random-start stimulation strategy does not impair the potential of the oocyte yield or clinical outcomes in oocyte donation cycles.

[Impact of donor parity on oocyte donation outcomes]. / Impact de la parité des donneuses sur les résultats du don d'ovocytes.

OBJECTIVES: Since 2015, in France, men and women who have never procreated are allowed to donate their gametes. This has led to an increase in the number of female oocyte donors, whereas there are many couples waiting for gametes that have a long waiting time. The aim of this study is to compare the results of donation with oocytes from nulliparous and non-nulliparous donors. METHODS: Monocentric retrospective observational study (Lille University Hospital) between January 1st, 2016 and December 31st, 2019. Phenotypic characteristics and clinical and biological outcomes of oocytes donations were compared according to donor parity (nulliparous versus primiparous or multiparous). RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-five donors (66 nulliparous and 119 non-nulliparous) were included in the study, allowing 284 ICSI cycles to be performed in recipient couples. On average, 11.5 oocytes were obtained per donation cycle, of which 7.8 were mature. In total, 4.6 mature oocytes were obtained per attempt and per recipient couple. Nulliparous donors are younger than non-nulliparous ones. An early pregnancy was obtained in 55.6% of the nulliparous donors and in 50.8% of the non-nulliparous donors (P=0.55). A progressive pregnancy was obtained in 49.2% of the nulliparous women and in 42.1% of the non-nulliparous women (P=0.36). There was therefore no difference in terms of early pregnancy and ongoing pregnancy whether the donation came from a nulliparous or non-nulliparous woman. CONCLUSION: Donor parity does not seem to have an impact on the success of oocyte donation attempts.

Sperm Donors' Identity Disclosure: Is It REALLY Crucial? For Whom?

OBJECTIVE: To study the preference of sperm donors with identity disclosure (ID) versus anonymous donors (AD) and to understand if this selection affects clinical outcomes in an Israeli population. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients who chose imported sperm donation during 2017-2021. Of these, 526 used their own (autologous) oocytes and 43 patients used donated oocytes (DO). The primary endpoint was the type of chosen donor with ID versus AD. We examined the tendency toward ID according to demographic parameters and the theoretical impact of donor-type selection on reproductive outcome and compared patients who performed cycles with autologous oocytes with those using DO. RESULTS: Single women had a significantly higher probability of choosing sperm donors with ID than heterosexual couples (55.6% vs. 33.3%, OR 2.5, CI 95% 1.52-4.11, P < 0.001). Although not significant, same-sex couples were more likely to choose sperm donors with ID than heterosexual couples (49.1% vs. 33.3%, OR 1.93, CI 95% 0.97-3.85, P = 0.06). Sperm donor samples, 2501 vials, were imported. It was performed 698 intra-uterine insemination and 812 in vitro fertilization cycles were performed, respectively, resulting in 283 pregnancies without differences between patients who chose sperm donors with ID versus AD sperm. No significant differences were observed regarding the option for sperm donors with ID between patients using DO (44.2%) and those using autologous oocytes (51.3%). CONCLUSION: While ID is important for a certain section (mainly single) of recipients, it is far from the only dominant factor during donor selection. Sperm donation type does not impact clinical outcomes.

Extended families? Contact expectations and experiences of egg donors donating to previously unknown recipients.

In New Zealand egg donation is identity-release, and donors may be known to recipients, e.g. family members/friends, or previously unknown e.g. clinic-recruited or sourced through advertising. In the case of unknown donors, New Zealand practice allows donors and recipients to meet face-to-face prior to donation in a joint counselling meeting. While contact details may not necessarily be exchanged in counselling, information-exchange and contact expectations are usually addressed. In previous papers, we explored donors' motivations and experiences of donation. In this paper, we explore donors' ideas around their role in relation to the donor-conceived person (DCP) and their expectations and experiences of information-exchange and contact. While donors did not see themselves as parents and were aware of appropriate boundaries, they described a sense of ongoing connection to DCP, often framing this in extended family terms. They desired to be kept informed about DCP, considered themselves 'on standby' for information requests or in-person contact and valued the opportunity for connection between their children and DCP. Donors were, however, cognisant of the limits to their ability to ensure information-exchange and contact and sometimes struggled with their perceived disempowered position. Meeting prior to donation may both clarify and reinforce expectations of information-exchange and contact.

Long-term follow-up of mental health and satisfaction in a Swedish sample of sperm and egg donors after open-identity donation.

RESEARCH QUESTION: How is the mental health of open-identity gamete donors and their satisfaction with their contributions 14-17 years after acceptance as a donor? DESIGN: The Swedish Study on Gamete Donation is a longitudinal study comprising women and men who were accepted as donors at seven Swedish university clinics between 2005 and 2008. The latest (fifth) follow-up included 215 open-identity donors (response rate 87%): 123 oocyte donors and 92 sperm donors. The donors answered a questionnaire regarding their perceptions, experiences and expectations after gamete donation 14-17 years previously. RESULTS: The donors were satisfied with the experience of donating, and no differences were detected between sperm and oocyte donors. Oocyte donors were more than twice as likely to feel that family and friends were proud of their donation compared with sperm donors (51% versus 23%, P < 0.001). In total, six donors regretted their donation: four oocyte donors and two sperm donors. Sperm donors were more frequently satisfied with the financial compensation compared with oocyte donors (P = 0.005). No difference in the development of symptoms of anxiety or depression was detected 14-17 years post-donation. CONCLUSION: Long-term follow-up studies on donors are important for recruiting donors, and for recipients and the children who will be conceived with donated gametes. The results from the current study indicate that donors, generally, have good mental health and do not regret their decision to donate gametes. These findings are reassuring for all parties involved.

Providers' attitudes towards payment to egg donors: an international survey.

The research question 'How do fertility professionals worldwide perceive the issue of payment for egg donation and does this view change under different circumstances?' was addressed. A worldwide online survey was conducted between January and March 2023, focusing on the views of fertility providers concerning egg donor payments. From the 3,790 IVF-Worldwide.com members invited, 532 (14%) from 88 countries responded. The majority of participants, primarily from Europe (38.9%) and Asia (20.1%), were fertility specialists, embryologists, and fertility nurses. Most (60.3%) favoured regulated donor compensation, with only 13% advocating for unrestricted amounts. Compensation opposition (22.4%) was often rooted in concerns about donors' best interests. When considering egg donation from low-resource to high-resource countries, 38.5% were opposed. When asked about compensating women who underwent elective, non-medical egg freezing should they choose to donate their unused oocytes, most responders supported it to some degree, with only 28.4% opposing any compensation. The survey revealed that a significant majority of fertility professionals worldwide are supportive of some form of compensation for egg donors. However, perspectives diverge depending on the specific scenario and the country of practice.