4.7 Article

Fertility preservation in women with endometriosis: for all, for some, for none?

期刊

HUMAN REPRODUCTION
卷 30, 期 6, 页码 1280-1286

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dev078

关键词

endometriosis; fertility preservation; endometrioma

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The increasing confidence with the techniques of oocyte and ovarian cortex freezing has prompted their potential use for patient categories other than those at risk of early menopause due to cancer treatments. Women affected by every iatrogenic or pathologic condition known to compromise ovarian function severely have been considered as potential candidates for fertility preservation. Among them, women with endometriosis may represent a particularly suitable group since they are at increased risk of premature ovarian exhaustion and about half of them will experience infertility. Based on the currently available notions on the intricate relationships between endometriosis, infertility and damage to the ovarian reserve, we speculate that fertility preservation may be of interest for women with endometriosis, in particular for those with bilateral unoperated endometriomas and for those who previously had excision of unilateral endometriomas and require surgery for a contralateral recurrence. Young age at diagnosis may be an independent but pivotal additional factor to be taken into consideration in the balance of the pros and cons of fertility preservation. On the other hand, we argue against the introduction of fertility preservation for endometriosis in routine clinical practice. To date, only few cases have been reported and there are insufficient data for robust cost-utility analyses. It is noteworthy that endometriosis is a relatively common disease and systematically including affected women in a fertility preservation program would have profound clinical, logistic and financial effects. More clinical data and in-depth economic analysis are imperative prior to recommending its routine use.

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

4.7
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