Human reproduction最新文献

Study question: How do adult transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people, who are infertile due to prior gender-affirming treatment, view their current infertility and their reproductive decisions made in the past?

Summary answer: In a time where sterilization was mandatory, transgender adolescents prioritized gender-affirming treatment over their future fertility and would make the same choice today despite emotional challenges related to infertility experienced by some.

What is known already: Under transgender law in the Netherlands, sterilization was required for legal gender recognition until 2014, resulting in permanent infertility. The long-term consequences of this iatrogenic infertility in transgender adolescents who have now reached adulthood remain underexplored.

Study design, size, duration: Qualitative study design based on 21 in-depth one-on-one semi-structured interviews.

Participants/materials, setting, methods: TGD people in a stage of life where family planning may be a current topic were eligible for participation. They all received gender-affirming treatment in adolescence prior to the legislation change in 2014. A purposeful sampling technique was used from participants of another ongoing study. Eleven people assigned female at birth and ten people assigned male at birth were included. Interview transcripts were thematically analysed using a modified version of Braun and Clarke's six steps theory.

Main results and the role of chance: Six main themes were generated: (i) personal considerations regarding fertility and fertility preservation in the past; (ii) external considerations regarding fertility and fertility preservation in the past; (iii) current vision on past considerations and decisions; (iv) Current experiences and coping with infertility; (v) future family building; (vi) advice regarding fertility and fertility preservation decision-making.

Limitations, reasons for caution: Selection, recall, and choice supportive bias may play a role in interpreting our results.

Wider implications of the findings: This study highlights the importance of tailored counselling and comprehensive information on fertility preservation for transgender individuals, especially adolescents, undergoing gender-affirming treatment.

Study funding/competing interest(s): N/A.

Trial registration number: N/A.

Quality healthcare requires two critical components: patients' best interests and best decisions to achieve that goal. The first goal is the lodestar, unchanged and unchanging over time. The second component is a more dynamic and rapidly changing paradigm in healthcare. Clinical decision-making has transitioned from an opinion-based paradigm to an evidence-based and data-driven process. A realization that technology and artificial intelligence can bring value adds a third component to the decision process. And the fertility sector is not exempt. The debate about AI is front and centre in reproductive technologies. Launching the transition from a conventional provider-driven decision paradigm to a software-enhanced system requires a roadmap to enable effective and safe implementation. A key nodal point in the ascending arc of AI in the fertility sector is how and when to bring these innovations into the ART routine to improve workflow, outcomes, and bottom-line performance. The evolution of AI in other segments of clinical care would suggest that caution is needed as widespread adoption is urged from several fronts. But the lure and magnitude for the change that these tech tools hold for fertility care remain deeply engaging. Exploring factors that could enhance thoughtful implementation and progress towards a tipping point (or perhaps not) should be at the forefront of any 'next steps' strategy. The objective of this Opinion is to discuss four critical areas (among many) considered essential to successful uptake of any new technology. These four areas include value proposition, innovative disruption, clinical agency, and responsible computing.

IVF laboratories routinely adopt morphological pronuclear assessment at the zygote stage to identify abnormally fertilized embryos deemed unsuitable for clinical use. In essence, this is a pseudo-genetic test for ploidy motivated by the notion that biparental diploidy is required for normal human life and abnormal ploidy will lead to either failed implantation, miscarriage, or significant pregnancy complications, including molar pregnancy and chorionic carcinoma. Here, we review the literature associated with ploidy assessment of human embryos derived from zygotes displaying a pronuclear configuration other than the canonical two, and the related pregnancy outcome following transfer. We highlight that pronuclear assessment, although associated with aberrant ploidy outcomes, has a low specificity in the prediction of abnormal ploidy status in the developing embryo, while embryos deemed abnormally fertilized can yield healthy pregnancies. Therefore, this universal strategy of pronuclear assessment invariably leads to incorrect classification of over 50% of blastocysts derived from atypically pronucleated zygotes, and the systematic disposal of potentially viable embryos in IVF. To overcome this limitation of current practice, we discuss the new preimplantation genetic testing technologies that enable accurate identification of the ploidy status of preimplantation embryos and suggest a progress from morphology-based checks to molecular fertilization check as the new gold standard. This alternative molecular fertilization checking represents a possible non-incremental and controversy-free improvement to live birth rates in IVF as it adds to the pool of viable embryos available for transfer. This is especially important for the purposes of 'family building' or for poor-prognosis IVF patients where embryo numbers are often limited.