4.7 Article

Risks associated with fertility preservation for women with sickle cell anemia

期刊

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
卷 110, 期 4, 页码 720-731

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.05.016

关键词

Bone marrow transplant; female infertility; fertility preservation treatment; sickle cell anemia; sickle cell disease

资金

  1. NIDA NIH HHS [K24 DA037804] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To highlight the risk of complications among women with sickle cell anemia (SCA) receiving fertility preservation treatment (FPT) before hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). Design: Single-center case series. Setting: Academic fertility center. Patient(s): Women aged 15-32 years with SCA undergoing FPT before HSCT. Intervention(s): Retrospective, systematic review. Main Outcome Measure(s): FPT modality, SCA complications during FPT. Result(s): Over an 8-year period (2009-2017), seven women with SCA ages 15-32 years (mean 28.5 years) underwent FPT with embryo cryopreservation (n = 1), oocyte cryopreservation (n = 4), and ovarian tissue cryopreservation (n = 2). The five women subjects who underwent oocyte or embryo cryopreservation were treated with an antagonist controlled ovarian hyperstimulation protocol and individualized gonadotropin dosing. The trigger medications included leuprolide acetate (n = 2), and human chorionic gonadotropin (n = 3). Most patients (n = 5) received a disease-modifying therapy for SCA (hydroxyurea or chronic transfusions) before FPT. Three patients experienced periprocedural SCA complications that included life-threatening respiratory failure, painful crisis requiring interruption of a stimulation cycle, and severe postharvest painful crisis. Conclusion(s): Women with SCA may choose to undergo diverse FPT strategies before HSCT and are at risk for serious SCA-related complications. Evidence-based strategies to mitigate SCA-related morbidity and to optimize fertility preservation outcomes are needed. (C) 2018 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

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