Therapeutic advances in reproductive health最新文献

Background: Pregnant women are a special population in which hospitalizations are more recommended due to physiological changes mimicking pathologies and medico-legal concerns.

Objectives: We aimed to assess the obstetric outcomes of expectant mothers who were admitted to the obstetrics emergency outpatient clinic and declined the hospitalization advised by doctors. Additionally, we examined the appropriateness of physicians' recommendations.

Design: We have retrospectively evaluated the patients admitted to the 'Obstetric Emergency Outpatient Clinic' and refused hospitalization between 1 January 2019 and 31 December 2019.

Methods: Cases were classified into three groups based on the trimester, considering the substantial variation between complaints and complications in each trimester. The complaints of pregnant women were categorized as psychosocial causes, obstetric complications, maternal systemic complaints, and suspicion of labor. We evaluated the compatibility of the hospitalization decision with the pregnancy outcome of patients.

Results: A total of 958 pregnant women were included in the study. Leading causes for admissions were obstetric complications, maternal systemic complaints, and suspicion of labor in first, second, and third trimesters, respectively. Psychosocial causes were mostly observed in the second trimester. Readmission to the hospital within a week was highest in the third trimester group. According to pregnancy outcomes, 12.5% (94/753) of our recommendations were appropriate in all trimesters.

Conclusion: Obstetricians seem overcautious in managing obstetric patients and willing to offer hospitalization more often than the actual requirements.

Background: Currently, there is some evidence that adenomyosis patients using gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist long downregulation (LDR) prior to embryo transfer may improve in vitro fertilization (IVF) success rate, but not to the baseline expected success where there is no adenomyosis. Given the association between adenomyosis and an aberrant endometrial immune environment, many physicians also use prednisolone or Intralipid adjuvant treatments in combination with GnRH agonist therapy, despite neither being of proven benefit.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the addition of prednisolone or Intralipid immune therapy to GnRH agonist LDR improves fertility outcomes in patients with adenomyosis.

Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of 116 consecutive adenomyosis patients who underwent their first transfer of a genetically screened euploid embryo between January 2019 and December 2020 at a private IVF clinic.

Results: There was no difference in maternal age, body mass index, number of embryo's transferred and gravidity or parity among the three treatment groups. Patients who received Intralipid had a poorer prognosis with a longer duration of infertility (4 years) and a higher number of previous embryo transfers (ETs, 5 previous ETs) compared to the comparison groups. Logistic regression analysis adjustment for all covariates revealed that LDR plus Intralipid therapy produced significantly higher live birth rates (LBRs; 60%) compared to LDR alone (40% LBR); yet, the addition of prednisolone to GnRH agonist LDR (30% LBR) provided no additional live birth benefit.

Conclusion: In this retrospective analysis, we showed Intralipid adjuvant treatment in combination with GnRH agonist therapy in adenomyosis patients undergoing IVF resulted in a LBR expected in women without adenomyosis using preimplantation genetic testing screened embryos. This benefit was not seen when using prednisolone as an adjuvant to GnRH agonist LDR. Future randomized clinical trials will be required to confirm the therapeutic benefit of Intralipid in combination with GnRH agonist therapy.

The newly released World Professional Association for Transgender Health Standards of Care, 8th Edition specify that adolescents should be offered menstrual suppression as part of their treatment plans to suppress menses and alleviate dysphoria, provide contraception, or improve irregular bleeding on testosterone therapy. This is a review of current evidence-based options for reversible interventions for menstrual suppression in adolescents with gender dysphoria or incongruence. Shared decision-making should be used by the clinician at all times, and the clinician should be intentional in prioritizing the patient's stated needs and desires when offering interventions. No method should be withheld due to the experience of gender incongruence alone. Contraceptive options offering menstrual suppression include depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate, levonorgestrel intrauterine systems, progestin-only contraceptive pills, and combined hormonal contraceptives. Non-contraceptive options include norethindrone acetate, oral medroxyprogesterone acetate, gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues/agonists, and danazol. Certain patients may also benefit from non-pharmacologic interventions, such as specialty menstrual underwear.

Plain language summary: Using medicine to stop Menstrual periods in teens with gender incongruence Summary: Newly released recommendations for the care of teens and young adults with gender dysphoria or incongruence specifically recommend using medications to get rid of menstrual periods if desired or medically necessary. Patients may ask for this to help improve dysphoria, as a feature they want in birth control, or simply because they do not want to have periods. Because temporarily getting rid of periods is something that doctors can do for any patient old enough to have periods, patients with gender dysphoria should also be able to have their periods temporarily stopped using medications if requested. Doctors should ensure that they always help the patient make a decision that is right for them instead of prescribing what they think is right without considering the patient's input. Options for temporarily getting rid of periods can include birth control, such as oral contraceptive pills, patches, or rings; intrauterine devices; or shots, and it can also be done with things that are not birth control, such a progesterone pills or puberty blockers. Finally, some patients may only need improved period hygiene with period underwear to feel better in their bodies.

Access to reliable contraception is a pillar of modern society. The burden of unintended pregnancy has fallen disproportionately on the mother throughout human history; however, recent legal developments surrounding abortion have sparked a renewed interest in male factor contraceptives beyond surgical sterilization and condoms. Modern efforts to develop reversible male birth control date back nearly a century and initially focused on altering the hypothalamic-pituitary-testes axis. These hormonal contraceptives faced multiple barriers, including systemic side effects, challenging dosing regimens, unfavorable routes of delivery, and the public stigma surrounding steroid use. Novel hormonal agents are seeking to overcome these barriers by limiting the side effects and simplifying use. Non-hormonal contraceptives are agents that target various stages of spermatogenesis; such as inhibitors of retinoic acid, Sertoli cell-germ cell interactions, sperm ion channels, and other small molecular targets. The identification of reproductive tract-specific genes associated with male infertility has led to more targeted drug development, made possible by advances in CRISPR and proteolysis targeting chimeras (PROTACs). Despite multiple human trials, no male birth control agents have garnered regulatory approval in the United States or abroad. This narrative review examines current and emerging male contraceptives, including hormonal and non-hormonal agents.

Vasomotor symptoms of menopause (VMS), otherwise known as hot flashes, can significantly impact women's quality of life. Up to 87% of women report hot flashes during or after their menopause transition, and can last for a median duration of 7.4 years. The current mainstay of treatment and the most effective treatment for VMS is hormone therapy with estrogen. However, hormone therapy is not without risk, and the discovery of an effective nonhormonal treatment option with neurokinin B receptor antagonists for VMS provides an encouraging and potentially practice-changing treatment option for all women. This review will discuss the pathophysiology and mechanism of action, as well as review the current compounds in development targeting the neurokinin receptors.

The vaginal contraceptive ring is very effective and user dependent. In this article, we will discuss the different types of vaginal contraceptive rings, namely, the etonogestrel/ethinyl estradiol (ENG/EE) ring (NuvaRing, Merck, Rahway, NJ, USA) and the segesterone acetate (SA)/EE (Annovera, Mayne Pharma, Raleigh, NC, USA) ring. The details of dosing and administration, indications, advantages, disadvantages, and cost-effectiveness are presented. This literature review was conducted using PubMed and Google Scholar. The search terms included 'vaginal contraceptive ring', 'etonogestrel/ethinyl estradiol ring', and 'segesterone acetate/ethinyl estradiol ring'. The search was then sorted by year from 2000 until present, and the most recent articles were reviewed. The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive reference on the two vaginal contraceptive rings widely used in the United States for clinicians to guide management. Both vaginal contraceptive rings are combination of hormonal contraceptives that suppress ovulation and create physiologic conditions unfavorable for pregnancy. The ENG/EE ring is designed to be replaced monthly, while the SA/EE ring is a single device used over the course of 1 year. Common side effects of both devices include headaches, nausea, vomiting, and vaginitis. Serious adverse reactions can occur with the vaginal contraceptive rings including venous thromboembolism, psychiatric events, and hypersensitivity. Both devices are contraindicated in patients at high risk for arterial or venous thrombotic events, patients with a history of breast cancer or other estrogen/progesterone cancers, and patients with severe liver disease. Overall, the vaginal contraceptive ring is well tolerated and liked by patients. Patients should be well counseled on known severe adverse reactions. The vaginal contraceptive ring is more expensive than other forms of contraception and this should be an important point of discussion with patients.

Background: Fertility preservation is an important quality of life issue for women of reproductive age undergoing gonadotoxic treatment. The possibility of administering an adjuvant long-acting gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) with the aim of reducing the number of follicles susceptible to the effects of chemotherapy and thus reducing the risk of ovarian damage is considered in some international society guidelines, particularly in certain cancers such as breast cancer. Nowadays, the administration of long-acting GnRHa after controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) for fertility preservation by cryopreservation of oocytes or embryos is increasingly used. However, cases of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) have been reported following the use of long-acting GnRHa after COH for fertility preservation, indicating that the potential adverse effects of this treatment need to be further investigated.

Objectives: The aim of this systematic review was to comprehensively characterize patients who developed OHSS after treatment with long-acting GnRHa following COH for fertility preservation.

Methods: A comprehensive search of major electronic databases through January 2023 was performed. Studies reporting the use of long-acting GnRHa after COH for fertility preservation and the development of OHSS were included. Risk of bias was assessed using a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results were synthesized qualitatively.

Results: Three studies with five patients met the eligibility criteria. The majority of patients were diagnosed with breast cancer and all patients underwent COH for oocyte cryopreservation. OHSS occurred in all patients after administration of long-acting GnRHa. The interval between ovulation induction and administration of long-acting GnRHa thereafter ranged from 3 to 5 days. All patients were treated conservatively and recovered without complications.

Conclusion: Current evidence suggests that the use of long-acting GnRHa after COH for fertility preservation may be associated with OHSS. Healthcare providers should thoroughly discuss the benefits and risks of this intervention with their patients before making a decision. Further studies are needed to fully elucidate the causal relationship between long-acting GnRHa and OHSS in this population.

Many factors associated with assisted reproductive technologies significantly influence the success of pregnancy after in vitro fertilization (IVF) either directly or indirectly. These factors include sperm processing techniques, egg retrieval, intrauterine artificial insemination, intracytoplasmic sperm injection, and embryo transfer. Among these technologies, sperm quality is one of the most critical factors for a successful IVF pregnancy. The method used for sperm processing plays a crucial role in determining the quality of sperm. Several widely used sorting techniques, such as conventional swim-up, density gradient centrifugation, magnetic activated cell sorting, and hyaluronic acid, have been extensively compared in various studies. Previous studies have shown that each sperm processing method causes varying degrees of sperm damage, particularly in sperm motility, concentration, morphological features, viability, and DNA integrity. However, sperm processing techniques have been developed slowly, and the impact of these methods on pregnancy rates is still unclear. Further exploration is needed. In this review, we aim to compare the results of different sperm processing techniques concerning sperm quality and IVF pregnancy rates. We will also discuss possible clinical approaches, such as microfluidics and integrated approaches, for testing and improving sperm quality.

Woman-controlled, vaginally administered contraceptives offer women discreet, self-administered, and reversible options. This brief report summarizes the mechanisms of action (MOAs) of currently available, woman-controlled, vaginally administered, non-hormonal products, excluding those that need to be fitted by a healthcare provider. MOAs of three general types of contraceptives will be reviewed, including pH modulators, spermicides, and barrier methods. The recently approved vaginal pH modulator (lactic acid, citric acid, and potassium bitartrate) has a non-hormonal MOA, acting as a buffering agent in the presence of alkaline semen and resulting in sperm immobilization. In contrast, spermicides, such as nonoxynol-9, act by lysing sperm membranes, resulting in sperm death. Barrier methods, such as the diaphragm and female condom, prevent sperm from entering the uterus. In addition to their varying MOAs, each woman-controlled, vaginally administered method has different instructions for use, efficacy, side effects, and availability/insurance coverage, thus providing a range of characteristics to fit different needs and preferences.