4.2 Article

Exploring the potential impact of human papillomavirus on infertility and assisted reproductive technology outcomes

期刊

REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY
卷 23, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.repbio.2023.100753

关键词

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection; in -vitro fertilization (IVF); Assisted reproductive technology (ART); Human fertility; Semen sample

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a common sexually transmitted disease associated with cancer and reproductive health issues. The influence of HPV on assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcomes is not well understood, leading to a need for HPV testing in couples undergoing infertility treatments. Infertile men with seminal HPV infection may experience compromised sperm quality and reproductive function, highlighting the importance of investigating the correlation between HPV and ART outcomes. Understanding the potential detrimental effects of HPV on ART outcomes may have significant implications for infertility management.
Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a common sexually transmitted disease that has been linked to both cancer and reproductive health issues. While its impact on fertility and pregnancy success has been studied, there is still too little evidence about the influence of HPV on assisted reproductive technology (ART). Therefore, there exists a need for HPV testing in couples undergoing infertility treatments. Infertile men have been found to have a higher prevalence of seminal HPV infection, which can compromise sperm quality and reproductive function. As such, it could be important to investigate the correlation between HPV and ART outcomes in order to improve the quality of evidence. Understanding the potentially detrimental effects of HPV on ART outcomes may have promising important implications for the management of infertility. This minireview summarizes the so far limited de-velopments in this area and highlights the major need for further well-designed studies to address this issue.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据