Optimizing timing for intrauterine insemination (IUI) in donor sperm cycles: pre- versus post-ovulation insemination in natural cycles.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether pregnancy outcomes of natural cycle intrauterine insemination (IUI) with donor sperm can be improved by performing insemination after confirmation of ovulation. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study evaluated 751 couples undergoing 1170 cycles of artificial insemination with donor sperm (AID) in natural cycles between January 2018 and January 2021. Patients underwent AID either within 6-12 h after spontaneous luteinizing hormone (LH) surge (pre-ovulation group) or after ovulation was confirmed by ultrasound (post-ovulation group). Propensity score matching was performed to account for differences in baseline characteristics between groups. The main outcome measures of this study were clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, each group comprised 216 cycles. No significant differences were observed between the pre-ovulation and post-ovulation groups in terms of clinical pregnancy rate (30.6% vs 27.3%, respectively, p = .458) and live birth rate (25.0% vs 22.7%, respectively, p = .651). However, upon excluding cases of luteinized unruptured follicle syndrome (LUFS) from the pre-ovulation group, the clinical pregnancy rate (33.5% vs 27.3%, respectively, p = .043) and live birth rate (27.4% vs 22.7%, respectively, p = .039) were significantly higher in the pre-ovulation group. CONCLUSIONS: For fertile women undergoing AID in natural cycles, pre-ovulation insemination timing yielded superior pregnancy outcomes compared to post-ovulation insemination when ovulation was achieved. However, due to the occurrence of LUFS, pre- and post-ovulation AID resulted in comparable overall pregnancy outcomes in natural cycles.

Perinatal outcomes in lesbian couples employing shared motherhood IVF compared with those performing artificial insemination with donor sperm.

STUDY QUESTION: In lesbian couples, is shared motherhood IVF (SMI) associated with an increase in perinatal complications compared with artificial insemination with donor sperm (AID)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Singleton pregnancies in SMI and AID had very similar outcomes, except for a non-significant increase in the rate of preeclampsia/hypertension (PE/HT) in SMI (recipient's age-adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.9, 95% CI = 0.7-5.2; P = 0.19), but twin SMI pregnancies had a much higher frequency of PE/HT than AID twins (recipient's age-adjusted OR = 21.7, 95% CI = 2.8-289.4; P = 0.01). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Oocyte donation (OD) pregnancies are associated with an increase in perinatal complications, in particular, preterm delivery and low birth weight, and PE/HT. However, it is unclear to what extent these complications are due to OD process or to the conditions why OD was performed, such as advanced age and underlying health conditions. Unfortunately, the literature concerning perinatal outcomes in SMI is scarce. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Retrospective study involving 660 SMI cycles (299 pregnancies) and 4349 AID cycles (949 pregnancies) assisted over a 10-year period. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: All cycles fulfilling the inclusion criteria performed in lesbian couples seeking fertility treatment in 17 Spanish clinics of the same group. Pregnancy rates of SMI and AID cycles were compared. Perinatal outcomes were compared: gestational length, newborn weight, preterm and low birth rates, PE/HT rates, cesarean section rates, perinatal mortality, and newborn malformations. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Pregnancy rates were higher in SMI than in AID (45.3% versus 21.8%, P < 0.001). There was a non-significant trend to higher multiple rate in AID (4.7% versus 8.5%, P = 0.08). In single pregnancies, there were no differences between SMI and AID in gestational age (278 days (268-285) versus 279 (272-284), P = 0.24), preterm rate (8.3% versus 7.3%, P = 0.80), preterm <28 weeks (0.6% versus 0.4%, P = 1.00), newborn weight (3195 g (2915-3620) versus 3270 g (2980-3600), P = 0.296), low birth rate (6.4% versus 6.4%, P = 1.00), extremely low birth weight (0.6% versus 0.5%, P = 1.00), and the distribution of newborns by weight groups. Cesarean section rate, newborn malformation rate, and perinatal mortality were also similar in SMI and AID. Additionally, there was non-significant trend in hypertensive disorders to an increase in PE/HT among SMI (recipient's age-adjusted OR = 1.9, 95% CI = 0.7-5.2). Overall, perinatal data are consistent with what is reported in the general population. In twin pregnancies, the aforementioned perinatal parameters were also very similar in SMI and AID. However, SMI twin pregnancies had a very high risk of PE/HT when compared with AID (recipient's age-adjusted OR = 21.7, 95% CI = 2.8-289.4, P = 0.01). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Our data regarding the pregnancy course were obtained from information registered in the delivery report as well as from what was reported by the patients themselves, so a certain degree of inaccuracy cannot be ruled out. Additionally, in some parameters, there was up to 10% of data missing. However, since the methodology of reporting was the same in SMI and AID groups, one should not expect a differential reporting bias. It cannot be ruled out that the risk of PE/HT in simple gestations would be significant in a larger study. Additionally, in the SMI group allocation to the transfer of 2 embryos was not randomized so some bias is possible. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: SMI, if single embryo transfer is performed, seems to be is a safe procedure. Double embryo transfer should not be performed in SMI. Our data suggest that the majority of complications in OD could be related more with recipient status than with OD itself, since with SMI (performed in women without fertility problems) the perinatal complications were much lower than usually described in OD. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No external funding was received. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

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.

Unmet support needs in donor sperm treatment: consequences for parents and their donor-children.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Are unmet needs for psychosocial counselling, peer support and friends/family support in parents directly and/or indirectly related to the mental health of parents and their donor-children? DESIGN: A cross-sectional sample of 214 parents participated in this quantitative study via an online questionnaire. The sample comprised mothers and fathers in a heterosexual relationship (n = 85), mothers in a lesbian relationship (n = 67) and single mothers (n = 62). Parents were recruited via three Dutch fertility clinics and four network organizations. Unmet support needs were measured with an adapted version of the Unmet Needs for Parenting Support questionnaire, changing the original items into items about donor conception. The items were derived from a qualitative study and checked by experts in donor conception. The parents' mental health was measured with the Adult Self Report and the donor-children's mental health with the Child Behaviour Checklist. A multigroup mediation analysis was conducted to explore relationships between parents' unmet support needs and their child's mental health, with the parents' mental health as a possible mediator. RESULTS: There were no direct relations between parents' unmet support needs and the mental health of donor-children. Unmet needs for psychosocial counselling, peer support and friends/family support for parents and children's mental health were indirectly related through the mental health of the parents: 0.074 (CI 95%  = 0.013-0.136; P = 0.017), 0.085 (CI 95% = 0.018-0.151; P = 0.036) and 0.063 (CI 95% = 0.019-0.106; P = 0.013), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend that fertility clinics, network organizations and authorities for infertility counsellors make their support available to parents for extended periods after their treatment. Further qualitative studies are necessary to assess how to relieve unmet support needs during donor sperm treatment.

Donor sperm recipients: fertility treatments, trends, and pregnancy outcomes.

PURPOSE: To report fertility treatment use and outcomes among patients who use donor sperm for intrauterine insemination (IUI), in vitro fertilization (IVF), and reciprocal IVF (co-IVF). METHODS: This is a retrospective review of patients who used donor sperm at an urban, southeastern academic reproductive center between 2014 and 2020. RESULTS: Among the 374 patients presenting for care, 88 (23.5%) were single, 188 (50.3%) were in a same-sex female partnership, and 98 (26.2%) had a male partner with a diagnosis of male factor infertility. Most patients did not have infertility (73.2%). A total of 1106 cycles were completed, of which there were 931 IUI cycles, 146 traditional IVF cycles, and 31 co-IVF cycles. Live birth rates per cycle were 11% in IUI, 42% in IVF, and 61% in co-IVF. Of all resulting pregnancies, hypertensive disorders were most commonly experienced (18.0%), followed by preterm delivery (15.3%), neonatal complications (9.5%), gestational diabetes (4.8%), and fetal growth restriction (4.8%). Of the 198 infants born, fifteen (8.3%) required admission to the neonatal intensive care unit and three (1.7%) demised. Pregnancy and neonatal complications were more likely to occur in older patients and patients with elevated body mass index. CONCLUSION: The use of donor sperm for fertility treatment is increasing. These data show reassuring live birth rates; however, they also highlight the risks of subsequent pregnancy complications. With the expansion of fertility treatment options for patients, these data assist provider counseling of patients regarding anticipated cycle success rates and possible pregnancy complications.

Should Intra Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) be the primary insemination method in women undergoing IVF cycles with donor sperm?

PURPOSE: To compare efficacy of Intra Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) with conventional in vitro fertilization (IVF) on treatment outcome in women undergoing in vitro fertilization with donor sperm. METHODS: We examined retrospectively the outcome data from 203 patients undergoing fresh cycles of conventional IVF (cIVF) or ICSI and an additional 77 frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles during 2003-2014, all using donor sperm. Fertilization, cleavage, pregnancy and live birth rates and number of high-quality embryos were compared between cIVF and ICSI. RESULTS: Altogether 185 women underwent 479 transfer cycles of fresh embryos (237 cIVF vs. 224 ICSI and 18 "rescue ICSI" cycles). In addition, 77 FET cycles were compared (24 cIVF vs. 53 ICSI cycles). No differences were found between cIVF and ICSI in fertilization, cleavage, pregnancy and live birth rates (92.6% vs 92.2%, 73.4% vs 72.4%, 25.3% vs 27.2% and 13.1% vs 14.7%, respectively). Pregnancy and life birth rates remained similar even when FET cycles were included (25.8% vs 26.2% and 13.1% vs 13.7%, respectively). The use of ICSI was associated with lower rates of high-quality embryos (52.7% vs. 63.3%, P < 0.0001). A multivariate logistic regression analysis found that patients' age, number of transferred embryos and smoking were independently associated with the chance to conceive. Patient age correlated inversely with fertilization rate (r = - 0.13, P < 0.006).Non-smokers were more likely to become pregnant (OR = 2.23, P < 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that ICSI does not bypass the age-related decrease in oocyte quality in patients using donor sperm for IVF. Use of ICSI was associated with lower rates of high-quality embryos. The findings imply that ICSI should not be the primary method of insemination in patients undergoing IVF with donor sperm.

[Role of full-time nurses in reception of sperm donors in the sperm bank].

OBJECTIVE: To explore the necessity of reception of sperm donors by full-time nurses in the sperm bank by analyzing the efficiency of sperm donation before and after staffing Guangdong Sperm Bank (GSB) with full-time nurses. METHODS: We selected 9 712 qualified sperm donors in GSB from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2021 and compared the efficiency of sperm donation before and after staffing GSB with full-time nurses. RESULTS: After staffing GSB with full-time nurses, the proportion of qualified sperm donors screened from the quasi-qualified ones was dramatically increased from 66.2% (1 230/1 858) to 77.1% (3 252/4 218) (P < 0.01), that of HIV re-examinees after 6-month suspension from sperm donation increased from 84.6% (137/162) to 93.4% (599/641) (P < 0.01), and that of the candidate donors lost to follow-up during the screening period decreased from 23.2% (831/3 583) to 21.3% (1 308/6 129) (P = 0.034). CONCLUSION: After Guangdong Sperm Bank was staffed with full-time nurses for reception of sperm donors, the proportion of the candidate donors lost to follow-up was reduced and the efficiency of sperm donation was significantly improved. Individualized psychological intervention for the sperm donors by the nurses could dispel the worries of the donors and improve the compliance and efficiency of sperm donation.

Reproductive outcomes of women aged 40 and older undergoing IVF with donor sperm.

STUDY QUESTION: Do women ≥40 years old without a male partner who utilize donor sperm have the same reproductive outcomes as those who utilize their partner's sperm? SUMMARY ANSWER: After controlling for relevant confounders, women ≥40 years old using donor sperm for IVF have significantly higher odds of having a live birth compared to those utilizing their partner's sperm. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Women who are unpartnered or in same-sex relationships are by definition not infertile, but may choose to conceive using donor sperm. It is not known how IVF outcomes are affected with the use of donor sperm compared to women utilizing their partner's sperm, particularly at very advanced maternal ages. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This is a retrospective cohort study conducted at a university-affiliated center of women undergoing IVF with fresh embryo transfer between 2008 and 2018. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Patients were divided into two groups based on the ejaculated sperm source utilized: donor or partner sperm. Live birth rate was the primary outcome. Pregnancy rate was the secondary outcome. Multivariable logistic regression was performed and adjusted for age, the developmental stage of the embryo, and the number of embryos transferred. Unadjusted odds ratio (OR) and adjusted OR (aOR) with 95% CI for pregnancy and live birth were estimated. Statistical significance was denoted by P < 0.05. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 3910 cycles in women ≥40 years old were analyzed, of which 307 utilized donor sperm and 3603 utilized their partner's sperm to conceive. In the univariate analysis, patients utilizing donor sperm were found to have similar pregnancy rates as those utilizing partner sperm (41.0 vs 39.8%, OR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.75-1.20). After adjusting for age, the number of embryos transferred and the developmental stage of the embryos, the model estimates did not vary (aOR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.95-1.56). Similarly, the univariate analysis for live birth did not demonstrate a difference between groups (19.2 vs 17.8%, OR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.67-1.22). However, after a similar adjustment was made for confounders, the use of donor sperm was associated with statistically significant increased odds of live birth (aOR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.01-1.88). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: As with any retrospective study, the potential for residual confounding exists, despite attempts to control for this with regression modeling. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Women ≥40 years old who are unpartnered or in same-sex relationships can be counseled that their odds of a live birth are slightly better than women in heterosexual relationships utilizing their partner's sperm. These findings serve to further refine and individualize counseling on the expected IVF outcomes for women in this population. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No funding was sought for this study. The authors declare no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Has oncofertility information for male patients improved? Objective assessment of internet-based fertility preservation resources at NCI cancer centers from 2015 to 2020.

PURPOSE: Fertility preservation is a critical patient counseling component following cancer diagnosis. The aim of this study was to compare change and quality of fertility preservation information available to patients on the websites of National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers over 5 years (2015 to 2020) for both women and men. METHODS: All NCI-designated cancer center websites were queried for information on oncofertility in 2020 publicly available to patients using the methodology and rubric previously employed in 2015. Data was evaluated based on each center's city, county, and state by demographic data obtained from the US Census. Additionally, the yearly number of in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles performed in the city, county, and state of each NCICC was included using websites of clinics reporting data to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. RESULTS: Significantly NCICCs have a standalone pages for fertility preservation in 2020 compared with 2015 (p = 0.004). There is a statistically significant association between discussion of male fertility and the number of fertility centers in the county and state of the NCICC (p = 0.04 and p = 0.001). NCICCs in counties in the highest quartile of per capita income were significantly more likely to address male fertility (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Oncofertility information on NCICC websites has improved between 2015 and 2020. The impact of cancer treatment on male fertility, while improved, is still limited, particularly in counties with lower per capita income.

[Correlation of stigma with marital adjustment in female patients undergoing artificial insemination with donor sperm].

Objective: To investigate the stigma and marital adjustment of the female patients undergoing artificial insemination with donor sperm (AID) and analyze their correlation. METHODS: Using the convenience sampling method, we selected 208 infertile female patients undergoing AID from March to December 2020. We conducted a cross-sectional survey among the patients with General Information Questionnaire, Infertility Stigma Scale (ISS), and Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS). RESULTS: The total ISS score and DAS score of the patients were 54.19 ± 14.52 and 116.23 ± 15.30, respectively. Pearson analysis showed that the total and individual item ISS scores were negatively correlated with the DAS score (P < 0.01). Multivariate linear regression analysis manifested that stigma was an important factor influencing marriage adjustment (P < 0.01) and explained 34.1% of the total variations. CONCLUSIONS: Stigma is an important factor affecting marital adjustment in female patients undergoing AID and negatively correlated with marital adjustment: The lower the stigma, the better the marital adjustment. Adequate attention should be paid to the stigma of the infertile women undergoing AID and targeted measures should be developed for its intervention.

Psychosocial counselling in donor sperm treatment: unmet needs and mental health among heterosexual, lesbian and single women.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the unmet needs after psychosocial counselling and mental health of women who opt for donor sperm treatment (DST), and are unmet counselling needs related to their mental health? DESIGN: This quantitative study included women in a heterosexual relationship (n = 19), women in a lesbian relationship (n = 25) and single women (n = 51) who opted for DST. Women were included if they had passed the DST intake procedure at a Dutch fertility clinic, were not pregnant and had no previous donor-child. Unmet needs were measured by a self-developed questionnaire based on specific topics identified in a previous qualitative study with added items from experts in the field of DST. The Adult Self Report was used to measure mental health. Relationships between unmet counselling needs and mental health were explored by multiple regression analyses. RESULTS: Fifty-two women (55%) reported unmet counselling needs. Women in heterosexual relationships mostly had unmet counselling needs on the topics of the decision to opt for DST (n = 11, 58%) and non-genetic parenthood (n = 11, 58%); women in lesbian relationships (n = 10, 40%) and single women (n = 14, 27%) mostly had unmet needs on the topic of choosing a sperm donor. In general, women had good mental health, but 13 (14%) met the criteria for clinical mental health problems. Women with more unmet counselling needs also had more mental health problems. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based guidelines for psychosocial counselling in DST should be developed. Only then can counselling be improved and be fit for purpose.

Reproductive outcomes with donor sperm in couples with severe male-factor infertility after intracytoplasmic sperm injection failures.

PURPOSE: To evaluate reproductive outcomes of artificial insemination and IVF with donor sperm (AID or IVF-D) for male-factor couples with a history of unsuccessful ICSI attempt. METHODS: This retrospective cohort includes couples with severe male-factor infertility who failed ICSI treatment, and subsequently underwent semen donation treatment. We report the following outcomes: (1) live birth rates in AID and IVF-D treatment for couples with severe male infertility factors and prior ICSI failures; (2) paternal impact on embryo development of the same oocyte cohort; (3) prognostic factors in obtaining a live birth with donor semen. RESULTS: Of 92 women with failed ICSI cycles (26 with multiple attempts), 45 couples underwent AID treatment. Live birth rate per cycle of AID was 18.9%. Fifty-three patients underwent IVF-D including 6 couples who previously did not conceive with AID. Embryological outcomes including fertilization, viable cleavage embryos, and blastocyst formation rates were significantly lower in ICSI cycles with partner sperm compared with IVF-D (P < 0.01). Logistic regression analysis showed that female age and the severity of spermatogenetic disorder are prognostic factors in obtaining a live birth with donated sperm. CONCLUSION: Couples with severe male infertility factor (azoospermia or extreme oligoasthenospermia) and a history of unsuccessful ICSI cycles benefit from treating with donor sperm. ICSI fertilization, embryo viability, and progression of the embryo to the blastocyst stage are significantly deteriorated by semen parameters. The prognostic factors identified may help couples plan their treatment and prepare for their parenthood journey.

Psychosocial counselling for intended parents who opt for donor sperm treatment: which topics do they find relevant?

Objective: This study aimed to explore which topics intended parents who opt for donor sperm treatment find relevant to discuss in psychosocial counselling. Background: The choice for donor sperm treatment has psychosocial implications for intended parents and therefore psychosocial counselling is advised as an integral part of DST. To date, little is known about which topics intended parents find relevant to discuss in psychosocial counselling. Methods: We conducted 25 semi-structured in-depth interviews between 2015 and 2017 with heterosexual men and women, lesbian women and single women who opted for donor sperm treatment and had a counselling session as part of their intake. They were recruited through three Dutch fertility centres, three network organisations and by snowball sampling. Results: Intended parents found it relevant to discuss the following seven topics in psychosocial counselling: the decision to opt for donor sperm treatment, choosing a sperm donor, coping with questions from family and friends, non-genetic parenthood, single motherhood, openness and disclosure, and future contact between the child and half-siblings. Conclusion: We recommend that counsellors take a more active role in bringing up the topics found in our study and that a clear distinction is made between counselling with the aim to screen intended parents and counselling with the aim to offer guidance.

The incidence of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy following sperm donation in IVF: an Australian state-wide retrospective cohort study.

STUDY QUESTION: Does IVF using donor sperm increase the risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and fetal growth restriction (FGR)? SUMMARY ANSWER: IVF conceptions arising from sperm donation are not associated with an increased risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy or FGR. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: It has been hypothesized that the absence of prior exposure to factors within the paternal ejaculate increases the risk of preeclampsia and FGR among nulliparous women or women with a new partner-the concept of 'primipaternity'. It remains unclear which element of the ejaculate is responsible: the sperm cell or the constituents of seminal fluid. IVF pregnancies arising from donor sperm where the seminal fluid is absent provide a unique opportunity to test the theory of primipaternity and the relative contribution of the sperm cell. Pregnancies conceived via artificial reproductive technology are at increased risk of preeclampsia and FGR. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Theories about the development of preeclampsia and the relative contribution of spermatic factors were explored by comparing the risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and FGR among IVF pregnancies conceived with autologous gametes (own eggs and partner sperm) and those conceived with donor sperm, donor egg (and partner sperm) and donor embryo. To do this, we performed a retrospective cohort analysis of pregnancy outcomes among singleton pregnancies (n = 15 443) conceived through fertility clinics within Australia between 2009 and 2017. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: All pregnancies resulting in a singleton pregnancy delivering after 20 weeks' gestation were included. The cohort was divided into donor sperm, donor egg and donor embryo (where both gametes came from a donor to create an embryo, or in a surrogate pregnancy) groups. We also compared the data with a control group, defined as IVF-conceived pregnancies from autologous cycles. A multivariable regression model was used to calculate an adjusted odds ratio (aOR). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The final cohort contained 1435, 578 and 239 pregnancies conceived by donor sperm, donor egg and donor embryo, respectively, and 13 191 controls. There were a very small number of women lost to follow-up (31 women; 0.2% of total cohort). Compared to control pregnancies, there was no increase in the risk of hypertensive disorders among pregnancies conceived via donor sperm (aOR 0.94; 95% CI 0.73-1.21). Subgroup analysis was performed for a cohort where parity was known (n = 4551), and of these, 305 multigravida pregnancies were conceived via donor sperm. Among this cohort, no increased risk of preeclampsia or pregnancy-induced hypertension was found (aOR 1.18; 95% CI: 0.69-2.04) as a result of primipaternity (new sperm donor).A significantly increased risk for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy was associated with the use of donor eggs (but partner sperm; aOR 2.34; 95% CI 1.69-3.21). However, the association was no greater among pregnancies conceived with donor embryos (i.e. donated egg and sperm; aOR 2.0; 95% CI 1.25-3.17) than among the donor oocyte group. The overall incidence of FGR (defined as birthweight <10th centile) was 18%. There were no significant differences observed between donor sperm, or donor embryo pregnancies; however, egg donation was associated with a 1.5-fold increase in FGR. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This study was limited by a lower than expected rate of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (n = 862, 5.6%), which is contrary to the well-established increased risk among women using IVF. However, this is likely to be evenly distributed across the study groups and, therefore, unlikely to have introduced significant bias. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: These findings suggest that exposure to new sperm may not be implicated in the pathogenesis of preeclampsia. The mechanism of increased risk seen in conceptions arising from egg or embryo donation remains unclear. Further investigation is required to elucidate these mechanisms and, ultimately, improve pregnancy outcomes following IVF. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was supported by the Australian Commonwealth Government-Graduate Research Scheme (A.K.). Salary support was provided by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (S.T.), Mercy Foundation (A.L.), and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the University of Melbourne (R.H.). There are no competing interests.

Can anti-Müllerian hormone predict success outcomes in donor sperm inseminations?

Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) is a useful biomarker to predict the ovarian response to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for IVF. However, currently there is a lack of evidence for the role of ovarian reserve markers when there is no need of COS. The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of AMH to predict the outcomes of donor sperm insemination cycles in non-infertile women. A retrospective study including 139 healthy women, who underwent 348 intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles with donor sperms under the stimulated or natural cycles, was conducted. All patients had an AMH evaluation performed before starting the first IUI attempt. AMH levels were similar in both, women who conceived and those who did not (2.00 ± 1.52 vs. 1.88 ± 1.64 ng/ml; p = .45). The area under the ROC curve in predicting pregnancy for AMH was 0.53. After adjusting for other confounding variables, the multivariate analysis revealed that AMH was not associated with pregnancy (aOR 0.89; 95% CI 0.57-1.37). We conclude that AMH is not predictive of pregnancy in healthy non-infertile women who perform IUI with donor sperm. These findings suggest the low capability of AMH to predict fertility when no COS is needed.

The Discriminatory Legal Barrier of Partner Consent in Victorian ART Law: EHT18 v Melbourne IVF.

In September 2018, the Federal Court of Australia found that a Victorian woman did not need her estranged husband's consent to undergo in vitro fertilisation treatment (IVF) using donor sperm. The woman, who was 45 years of age, made an urgent application to the Court for permission to undergo IVF using donor sperm. In a single judge ruling, Griffiths J held that the requirement in the Assisted Reproductive Treatment Act 2008 (Vic) ('ART Act') for a married woman to obtain the consent of her husband discriminated against the woman in question on the basis of her marital status in contravention of the Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) ('SD Act'). His Honour declared the Victorian law in this instance 'invalid and inoperable' by operation of section 109 of the Commonwealth Constitution to the extent it was inconsistent with the Commonwealth law. Although the declarations by the Federal Court were limited in their terms to the circumstances of the case, the judgment raises broader issues about equity of access to assisted reproductive treatment (ART) in Victoria. The issue of partner consent as a barrier to access to ART was specifically raised by an independent review of the ART Act in Victoria. The Victorian Government released an interim report late last year as a first stage of the review, which canvasses some options for reform. This raises a broader question as to whether prescriptive legislation imposing detailed access requirements for ART is necessary or even helpful.

Perinatal outcomes following IVF with use of donor versus partner sperm.

It is a matter of interest whether pregnancies with the use of donor sperm are associated with a higher risk of adverse perinatal outcomes compared with partner sperm. Anonymized data were obtained from the Human Fertilization & Embryology Authority. Data from 1991 to 2011 involving a total of 95,787 singleton births (4523 with donor sperm and 91,264 with partner sperm) following fresh IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) were analysed to compare perinatal outcomes of preterm birth (PTB), low birthweight (LBW) and high birthweight (HBW). The risk of LBW was significantly lower (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79-0.99) following donor sperm versus partner sperm IVF/ICSI. There was no significant difference in the risk of PTB (aOR 0.93, 95% CI: 0.83-1.04), early PTB (aOR 0.86, 95% CI: 0.67-1.11), very LBW (aOR 0.95, 95% CI: 0.75-1.20), HBW (aOR 1.09, 95% CI: 0.98-1.21) and very HBW (aOR 1.15, 95% CI: 0.90-1.45) following donor sperm versus partner sperm IVF/ICSI. The current study did not demonstrate an increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes following donor sperm compared with partner sperm IVF/ICSI treatment.

Assisted reproductive technology with donor sperm: national trends and perinatal outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Information regarding the use of donor sperm in assisted reproductive technology, as well as subsequent treatment and perinatal outcomes, remains limited. Outcome data would aid patient counseling and clinical decision making. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the study were to report national trends in donor sperm utilization and live birth rates of donor sperm-assisted reproductive technology cycles in the United States and to compare assisted reproductive technology treatment and perinatal outcomes between cycles using donor and nondonor sperm. We hypothesize these outcomes to be comparable between donor and nondonor sperm cycles. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study using data from all US fertility centers reporting to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance System, accounting for ∼98% of assisted reproductive technology cycles (definition excludes intrauterine insemination). The number and percentage of assisted reproductive technology cycles using donor sperm and rates of pregnancy, live birth, preterm birth (<37 weeks), and low birthweight (<2500 g) were the primary outcomes measured. Treatments assessed include use of donor vs nondonor sperm. The trends analysis included all banking and fresh assisted reproductive technology cycles using donor and autologous oocytes performed between 1996 and 2014 (n = 1,710,034). The outcomes analysis was restricted to include only fresh autologous cycles performed between 2010 and 2014 (n = 437,569) to focus on cycles with a potential outcome and cycles reflective of current practice, thereby improving the clinical relevance. Cycles canceled prior to retrieval were excluded. Statistical analysis included linear regression to explore polynomial trends and log-binomial regression to estimate relative risk for outcomes among cycles using donor and nondonor sperm. RESULTS: Of all banking and fresh donor and autologous oocyte assisted reproductive technology cycles performed between 1996 and 2014, 74,892 (4.4%) used donor sperm. In 2014, 7351 assisted reproductive technology cycles using donor sperm were performed, as compared with 1763 in 1996 (6.2% vs 3.8% of all cycles). Among all autologous oocyte cycles performed between 2010 and 2014, the live birth rate was lower for donor sperm (27.9%) than nondonor sperm cycles (32.5%); however, after adjustment for maternal age, donor sperm use was associated with an increased likelihood of live birth (adjusted relative risk, 1.06, 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.10). Per transfer, there was no significant difference in live birth rates for donor vs nondonor sperm (31.9% vs 36.8%; adjusted relative risk, 1.04, 95% confidence interval, 0.998-1.09). Per singleton live birth, there was no significant difference in preterm birth (11.5% vs 11.8%; adjusted relative risk, 0.98, 95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.06); however, low birthweight delivery was slightly lower in donor sperm cycles (8.8% vs 9.4%; adjusted relative risk, 0.91, 95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.99). CONCLUSION: Donor sperm use in assisted reproductive technology has increased in the United States, accounting for approximately 6% of all assisted reproductive technology cycles in 2014. Assisted reproductive technology treatment and perinatal outcomes were clinically similar in donor and nondonor sperm cycles.

Effects of maternal body mass index on pregnancy outcome after 8570 artificial insemination cycles with donor's sperm.

Increased body mass index (BMI) might have an adverse effect on pregnancy. However, the influence of BMI on the pregnancy outcomes after artificial insemination with donor's sperm (AID) had been rarely reported. This study aimed to investigate the correlation between BMI and AID. The pregnancy outcome of 8570 AID cycles was retrospectively analyzed. BMI was categorized as underweight (<18.5 kg/m2; group A), normal weight (18.5-23.9 kg/m2; group B), overweight (24-27.9 kg/m2; group C), and obese (≥28 kg/m2; group D). The results showed that cumulative pregnancy rate and cumulative live birth rate in groups A, B, C and D tended to decrease as BMI increased; however, abortion rate, and ectopic pregnancy rate in groups A, B, C, and D exhibited a gradual increase in the tendency. Cesarean delivery rate also increased as BMI increased. Birth defect rate in the group D were significantly higher than that in the group A. Interestingly, the pregnancy rate was gradually decreased with increasing age in groups A, B, and C, but this was not observed in the group D. The findings suggested that BMI can affect the pregnancy outcomes after AID; it is important to achieve a normal BMI prior to AID treatments.

Attitudes of sperm, egg and embryo donors and recipients towards genetic information and screening of donors.

BACKGROUND: Gamete and embryo donors undergo genetic screening procedures in order to maximise the health of donor-conceived offspring. In the era of genomic medicine, expanded genetic screening may be offered to donors for the purpose of avoiding transmission of harmful genetic mutations. The objective of this study was to explore the attitudes of donors and recipients toward the expanded genetic screening of donors. METHODS: Qualitative interview study with thematic analysis, undertaken in a tertiary fertility centre. Semi-structured in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with eleven recipients and nine donors from three different cohorts (sperm, egg and embryo donors/recipients). RESULTS: Donors and recipients acknowledged the importance of genetic information and were comfortable with the existing level of genetic screening of donors. Recipients recognised some potential benefits of expanded genetic screening of donors; however both recipients and donors were apprehensive about extended genomic technologies, with concerns about how this information would be used and the ethics of genetic selectivity. CONCLUSION: Participants in donor programs support some level of genetic screening of donors, but are wary of expanding genetic screening beyond current levels.