STUDY QUESTION
What is the optimal management of women with endometriosis based on the best available evidence in the literature?
SUMMARY ANSWER
Using the structured methodology of the Manual for ...ESHRE Guideline Development, 83 recommendations were formulated that answered the 22 key questions on optimal management of women with endometriosis.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis (2005) has been a reference point for best clinical care in endometriosis for years, but this guideline was in need of updating.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION
This guideline was produced by a group of experts in the field using the methodology of the Manual for ESHRE Guideline Development, including a thorough systematic search of the literature, quality assessment of the included papers up to January 2012 and consensus within the guideline group on all recommendations. To ensure input from women with endometriosis, a patient representative was part of the guideline development group. In addition, patient and additional clinical input was collected during the scoping and review phase of the guideline.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS
NA.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
The guideline provides 83 recommendations on diagnosis of endometriosis and on the treatment of endometriosis-associated pain and infertility, on the management of women in whom the disease is found incidentally (without pain or infertility), on prevention of recurrence of disease and/or painful symptoms, on treatment of menopausal symptoms in patients with a history of endometriosis and on the possible association of endometriosis and malignancy.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION
We identified several areas in care of women with endometriosis for which robust evidence is lacking. These areas were addressed by formulating good practice points (GPP), based on the expert opinion of the guideline group members.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
Since 32 out of the 83 recommendations for the management of women with endometriosis could not be based on high level evidence and therefore were GPP, the guideline group formulated research recommendations to guide future research with the aim of increasing the body of evidence.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)
The guideline was developed and funded by ESHRE, covering expenses associated with the guideline meetings, with the literature searches and with the implementation of the guideline. The guideline group members did not receive payment. All guideline group members disclosed any relevant conflicts of interest (see Conflicts of interest).
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
NA.
Abstract
STUDY QUESTION
What are the European trends and developments in ART and IUI in 2014 as compared to previous years?
SUMMARY ANSWER
The 18th ESHRE report on ART shows a continuing expansion of ...both treatment numbers in Europe and more variability in treatment modalities resulting in a rising contribution to the birth rates in most participating countries.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
Since 1997, ART data generated by national registries have been collected, analysed by the European IVF-monitoring (EIM) Consortium and reported in 17 manuscripts published in Human Reproduction.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION
Continuous collection of European data by the EIM for ESHRE. The data for treatments performed in 2014 between 1 January and 31 December in 39 European countries were provided by national registries or on a voluntary basis by clinics or professional societies.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS
From 39 countries and 1279 institutions offering ART services, a total of 776 556 treatment cycles, involving 146 148 with IVF, 362 285 with ICSI, 192 027 with frozen embryo replacement (FER), 15 894 with PGT, 56 516 with egg donation (ED), 292 with IVM and 3404 with frozen oocyte replacement (FOR) were reported. European data on IUI using husband/partner's semen (IUI-H) and donor semen (IUI-D) were reported from 1364 institutions offering IUI in 26 countries and 21 countries, respectively. A total of 120 789 treatments with IUI-H and 49 163 treatments with IUI-D were included.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
In 14 countries (17 in 2013), where all institutions contributed to their respective national registers, a total of 291 235 treatment cycles were performed in a population of ~208 million inhabitants, corresponding to 1925 cycles per million inhabitants (range: 423-2978 per million inhabitants). After treatment with IVF the clinical pregnancy rates (PR) per aspiration and per transfer were marginally higher in 2014 than in 2013, at 29.9 and 35.8% versus 29.6 and 34.5%, respectively. After treatment with ICSI the PR per aspiration and per transfer were also higher than those achieved in 2013 (28.4 and 35.0% versus 27.8 and 32.9%, respectively). After FER with own embryos the PR continued to rise, from 27.0% in 2013 to 27.6% in 2014. After ED a similar trend was observed with PR reaching 50.3% per fresh transfer (49.8% in 2013) and 48.7% for FOR (46.4% in 2013). The delivery rates (DR) after IUI remained stable at 8.5% after IUI-H (8.6% in 2013) and at 11.6% after IUI-D (11.1% in 2013). In IVF and ICSI together, 1, 2, 3 and ≥4 embryos were transferred in 34.9, 54.5, 9.9 and in 0.7% of all treatments, respectively (corresponding to 31.4%, 56.3, 11.5% and 1% in 2013). This evolution in embryo transfer strategy in both IVF and ICSI resulted in a singleton, twin and triplet DR of 82.5, 17.0 and 0.5%, respectively (compared to 82.0, 17.5 and 0.5%, respectively, in 2013). Treatments with FER in 2014 resulted in a twin and triplet DR of 12.4 and 0.3%, respectively (versus 12.5 and 0.3% in 2013). Twin and triplet DR after IUI were 9.5 and 0.3%, respectively, after IUI-H (in 2013:9.5 and 0.6%) and 7.7 and 0.3% after IUI-D (in 2013: 7.5 and 0.3%).
LIMITATION, REASONS FOR CAUTION
The method of data collection and reporting varies among European countries. The EIM receives aggregated data from various countries with variable levels of completeness. Registries from a number of countries have failed to provide adequate data about the number of initiated cycles and deliveries. As long as incomplete data are provided, the results should be interpreted with caution.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
The 18th ESHRE report on ART shows a continuing expansion of treatment numbers in Europe. The number of treatments reported, the variability in treatment modalities and the rising contribution to the birth rates in most participating countries point towards the increasing impact of ART on reproduction in Europe. Being the largest data collection on ART, the report gives detailed information about ongoing developments in the field.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)
The study has no external funding and all costs are covered by ESHRE. There are no competing interests.
Abstract
STUDY QUESTION
The 16th European IVF-monitoring (EIM) report presents the data of the treatments involving assisted reproductive technology (ART) and intrauterine insemination (IUI) ...initiated in Europe during 2012: are there any changes compared with previous years?
SUMMARY ANSWER
Despite some fluctuations in the number of countries reporting data, the overall number of ART cycles has continued to increase year by year, the pregnancy rates (PRs) in 2012 remained stable compared with those reported in 2011, and the number of transfers with multiple embryos (3+) and the multiple delivery rates were lower than ever before.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
Since 1997, ART data in Europe have been collected and re-ported in 15 manuscripts, published in Human Reproduction.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION
Retrospective data collection of European ART data by the EIM Consortium for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). Data for cycles between 1 January and 31 December 2012 were collected from National Registers, when existing, or on a voluntary basis by personal information.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS
From 34 countries (+1 compared with 2011), 1111 clinics reported 640 144 treatment cycles including 139 978 of IVF, 312 600 of ICSI, 139 558 of frozen embryo replacement (FER), 33 605 of egg donation (ED), 421 of in vitro maturation, 8433 of preimplantation genetic diagnosis/preimplantation genetic screening and 5549 of frozen oocyte replacements (FOR). European data on intrauterine insemination using husband/partner's semen (IUI-H) and donor semen (IUI-D) were reported from 1126 IUI labs in 24 countries. A total of 175 028 IUI-H and 43 497 IUI-D cycles were included.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
In 18 countries where all clinics reported to their ART register, a total of 369 081 ART cycles were performed in a population of around 295 million inhabitants, corresponding to 1252 cycles per million inhabitants (range 325–2732 cycles per million inhabitants). For all IVF cycles, the clinical PRs per aspiration and per transfer were stable with 29.4 (29.1% in 2011) and 33.8% (33.2% in 2011), respectively. For ICSI, the corresponding rates also were stable with 27.8 (27.9% in 2011) and 32.3% (31.8% in 2011). In FER cycles, the PR per thawing/warming increased to 23.1% (21.3% in 2011). In ED cycles, the PR per fresh transfer increased to 48.4% (45.8% in 2011) and to 35.9% (33.6% in 2011) per thawed transfer, while it was 45.1% for transfers after FOR. The delivery rate after IUI remained stable, at 8.5% (8.3% in 2011) after IUI-H and 12.0% (12.2% in 2011) after IUI-D. In IVF and ICSI cycles, 1, 2, 3 and 4+ embryos were transferred in 30.2, 55.4, 13.3 and 1.1% of the cycles, respectively. The proportions of singleton, twin and triplet deliveries after IVF and ICSI (added together) were 82.1, 17.3 and 0.6%, respectively, resulting in a total multiple delivery rate of 17.9% compared with 19.2% in 2011 and 20.6% in 2010. In FER cycles, the multiple delivery rate was 12.5% (12.2% twins and 0.3% triplets). Twin and triplet delivery rates associated with IUI cycles were 9.0%/0.4% and 7.2%/0.5%, following treatment with husband and donor semen, respectively.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION
The method of reporting varies among countries, and registers from a number of countries have been unable to provide some of the relevant data such as initiated cycles and deliveries. As long as data are incomplete and generated through different methods of collection, results should be interpreted with caution.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
The 16th ESHRE report on ART shows a continuing expansion of the number of treatment cycles in Europe, with more than 640 000 cycles reported in 2012 with an increasing contribution to birthrate in many countries. However, the need to improve and standardize the national registries, and to establish validation methodologies remains manifest.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS
The study has no external funding; all costs are covered by ESHRE. There are no competing interests.
Abstract
STUDY QUESTION
How has the performance of the European regional register of the European IVF-monitoring Consortium (EIM)/European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) evolved ...from 1997 to 2016, as compared to the register of the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) of the USA and the Australia and New Zealand Assisted Reproduction Database (ANZARD)?
SUMMARY ANSWER
It was found that coherent and analogous changes are recorded in the three regional registers over time, with a different intensity and pace, that new technologies are taken up with considerable delay and that incidental complications and adverse events are only recorded sporadically.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
European data on ART have been collected since 1997 by EIM. Data collection on ART in Europe is particularly difficult due to its fragmented political and legal landscape. In 1997, approximately 78.1% of all known institutions offering ART services in 23 European countries submitted data and in 2016 this number rose to 91.8% in 40 countries.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION
We compared the changes in European ART data as published in the EIM reports (2001–2020) with those of the USA, as published by CDC, and with those of Australia and New Zealand, as published by ANZARD.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS
We performed a retrospective analysis of the published EIM data sets spanning the 20 years observance period from 1997 to 2016, together with the published data sets of the USA as well as of Australia and New Zealand. By comparing the data sets in these three large registers, we analysed differences in the completeness of the recordings together with differences in the time intervals on the occurrence of important trends in each of them. Effects of suspected over- and under-reporting were also compared between the three registers. X2 log-rank analysis was used to assess differences in the data sets.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
During the period 1997–2016, the numbers of recorded ART treatments increased considerably (5.3-fold in Europe, 4.6-fold in the USA, 3.0-fold in Australia and New Zealand), while the number of registered treatment modalities rose from 3 to 7 in Europe, from 4 to 10 in the USA and from 5 to 8 in Australia and New Zealand, as published by EIM, CDC and ANZARD, respectively. The uptake of new treatment modalities over time has been very different in the three registers. There is a considerable degree of underreporting of the number of initiated treatment cycles in Europe. The relationship between IVF and ICSI and between fresh and thawing cycles evolved similarly in the three geographical areas. The freeze-all strategy is increasingly being adopted by all areas, but in Europe with much delay. Fewer cycles with the transfer of two or more embryos were reported in all three geographical areas. The delivery rate per embryo transfer in thawing cycles bypassed that in fresh cycles in the USA in 2012, in Australia and New Zealand in 2013, but not yet in Europe. As a result of these changing approaches, fewer multiple deliveries have been reported. Since 2012, the most documented adverse event of ART in all three registers has been premature birth (<37 weeks). Some adverse events, such as maternal death, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, haemorrhage and infections, were only recorded by EIM and ANZARD.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION
The methods of data collection and reporting were very different among European countries, but also among the three registers. The better the legal background on ART surveillance, the more complete are the data sets. Until the legal obligation to report is installed in all European countries together with an appropriate quality control of the submitted data the reported numbers and incidences should be interpreted with caution.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
The growing number of reported treatments in ART, the higher variability in treatment modalities and the rising contribution to the birth rates over the last 20 years point towards the increasing impact of ART. High levels of completeness in data reporting have been reached, but inconsistencies and inaccuracies still remain and need to be identified and quantified. The current trend towards a higher diversity in treatment modalities and the rising impact of cryostorage, resulting in improved safety during and after ART treatment, require changes in the organization of surveillance in ART. The present comparison must stimulate all stakeholders in ART to optimize surveillance and data quality assurance in ART.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)
This study has no external funding and all costs are covered by ESHRE. There are no competing interests.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
N/A.
Abstract
STUDY QUESTION
How are ART and IUI regulated, funded and registered in European countries?
SUMMARY ANSWER
Of the 43 countries performing ART and IUI in Europe, and participating in the ...survey, specific legislation exists in only 39 countries, public funding (also available in the 39 countries) varies across and sometimes within countries and national registries are in place in 31 countries.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
Some information devoted to particular aspects of accessibility to ART and IUI is available, but most is fragmentary or out-dated. Annual reports from the European IVF-Monitoring (EIM) Consortium for ESHRE clearly mirror different approaches in European countries regarding accessibility to and efficacy of those techniques.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION
A survey was designed using the online SurveyMonkey tool consisting of 55 questions concerning three domains—legal, funding and registry. Answers refer to the countries’ situation on 31 December 2018.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTINGS, METHODS
All members of EIM plus representatives of countries not yet members of the Consortium were invited to participate. Answers received were checked, and initial responders were asked to address unclear answers and to provide any additional information they considered important. Tables of individual countries resulting from the consolidated data were then sent to members of the Committee of National Representatives of ESHRE, asking for a second check. Conflicting information was clarified by direct contact.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
Information was received from 43 out of the 44 European countries where ART and IUI are performed. Thirty-nine countries reported specific legislation on ART, and artificial insemination was considered an ART technique in 35 of them. Accessibility is limited to infertile couples in 11 of the 43 countries. A total of 30 countries offer treatments to single women and 18 to female couples. In five countries ART and IUI are permitted for treatment of all patient groups, being infertile couples, single women and same sex couples, male and female. Use of donated sperm is allowed in 41 countries, egg donation in 38, the simultaneous donation of sperm and egg in 32 and embryo donation in 29. Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) for monogenic disorders or structural rearrangements is not allowed in two countries, and PGT for aneuploidy is not allowed in 11; surrogacy is accepted in 16 countries. With the exception of marital/sexual situation, female age is the most frequently reported limiting criteria for legal access to ART—minimal age is usually set at
18 years and maximum ranging from 45 to 51 years with some countries not using numeric definition. Male maximum age is set in very few countries. Where permitted, age is frequently a limiting criterion for third-party donors (male maximum age 35 to 55 years; female maximum age 34 to 38 years). Other legal constraints in third-party donation are the number of children born from the same donor (in some countries, number of families with children from the same donor) and, in 10 countries, a maximum number of egg donations. How countries deal with the anonymity is diverse—strict anonymity, anonymity just for the recipients (not for children when reaching legal adulthood age), mixed system (anonymous and non-anonymous donations) and strict non-anonymity.
Public funding systems are extremely variable. Four countries provide no financial assistance to patients. Limits to the provision of funding are defined in all the others i.e. age (female maximum age is the most used), existence of previous children, maximum number of treatments publicly supported and techniques not entitled for funding. In a few countries, reimbursement is linked to a clinical policy. The definition of the type of expenses covered within an IVF/ICSI cycle, up to what limit and the proportion of out-of-pocket costs for patients is also extremely dissimilar.
National registries of ART and IUI are in place in 31 out of the 43 countries contributing to the survey, and a registry of donors exists in 18 of them.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION
The responses were provided by well-informed and committed individuals and submitted to double checking. Since no formal validation was in place, possible inaccuracies cannot be excluded. Also, results are a cross section in time and ART and IUI legislations within European countries undergo continuous evolution. Finally, several domains of ART activity were deliberately left out of the scope of this ESHRE survey.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
Results of this survey offer a detailed view of the ART and IUI situation in European countries. It provides updated and extensive answers to many relevant questions related to ART usage at national level and could be used by institutions and policymakers in planning services at both national and European levels.
Study funding/competing interest(s)
The study has no external funding, and all costs were covered by ESHRE. There were no competing interests.
ESHRE Pages are not externally peer reviewed. This article has been approved by the Executive Committee of ESHRE.
Abstract
STUDY QUESTION
What are the data and trends on ART and IUI cycle numbers and their outcomes, and on fertility preservation (FP) interventions, reported in 2018 as compared to previous years?
...SUMMARY ANSWER
The 22nd ESHRE report shows a continued increase in reported numbers of ART treatment cycles and children born in Europe, a decrease in transfers with more than one embryo with a further reduction of twin delivery rates (DRs) as compared to 2017, higher DRs per transfer after fresh IVF or ICSI cycles (without considering freeze-all cycles) than after frozen embryo transfer (FET) with higher pregnancy rates (PRs) after FET and the number of reported IUI cycles decreased while their PR and DR remained stable.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
ART aggregated data generated by national registries, clinics or professional societies have been gathered and analysed by the European IVF-monitoring Consortium (EIM) since 1997 and reported in 21 manuscripts published in Human Reproduction and Human Reproduction Open.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION
Data on medically assisted reproduction (MAR) from European countries are collected by EIM for ESHRE on a yearly basis. The data on treatment cycles performed between 1 January and 31 December 2018 were provided by either national registries or registries based on initiatives of medical associations and scientific organizations or committed persons of 39 countries.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS
Overall, 1422 clinics offering ART services in 39 countries reported a total of more than 1 million (1 007 598) treatment cycles for the first time, including 162 837 with IVF, 400 375 with ICSI, 309 475 with FET, 48 294 with preimplantation genetic testing, 80 641 with egg donation (ED), 532 with IVM of oocytes and 5444 cycles with frozen oocyte replacement (FOR). A total of 1271 institutions reported data on IUI cycles using either husband/partner’s semen (IUI-H; n = 148 143) or donor semen (IUI-D; n = 50 609) in 31 countries and 25 countries, respectively. Sixteen countries reported 20 994 interventions in pre- and post-pubertal patients for FP including oocyte, ovarian tissue, semen and testicular tissue banking.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
In 21 countries (21 in 2017) in which all ART clinics reported to the registry, 410 190 treatment cycles were registered for a total population of ∼ 300 million inhabitants, allowing a best estimate of a mean of 1433 cycles performed per million inhabitants (range: 641–3549). Among the 39 reporting countries, for IVF, the clinical PR per aspiration slightly decreased while the PR per transfer remained similar compared to 2017 (25.5% and 34.1% in 2018 versus 26.8% and 34.3% in 2017). In ICSI, the corresponding rates showed similar evolutions in 2018 compared to 2017 (22.5% and 32.1% in 2018 versus 24.0% and 33.5% in 2017). When freeze-all cycles were not considered for the calculations, the clinical PRs per aspiration were 28.8% (29.4% in 2017) and 27.3% (27.3% in 2017) for IVF and ICSI, respectively. After FET with embryos originating from own eggs, the PR per thawing was 33.4% (versus 30.2% in 2017), and with embryos originating from donated eggs 41.8% (41.1% in 2017). After ED, the PR per fresh embryo transfer was 49.6% (49.2% in 2017) and per FOR 44.9% (43.3% in 2017). In IVF and ICSI together, the trend towards the transfer of fewer embryos continues with the transfer of 1, 2, 3 and ≥4 embryos in 50.7%, 45.1%, 3.9% and 0.3% of all treatments, respectively (corresponding to 46.0%, 49.2%. 4.5% and 0.3% in 2017). This resulted in a reduced proportion of twin DRs of 12.4% (14.2% in 2017) and similar triplet DR of 0.2%. Treatments with FET in 2018 resulted in twin and triplet DRs of 9.4% and 0.1%, respectively (versus 11.2% and 0.2%, respectively in 2017). After IUI, the DRs remained similar at 8.8% after IUI-H (8.7% in 2017) and at 12.6% after IUI-D (12.4% in 2017). Twin and triplet DRs after IUI-H were 8.4% and 0.3%, respectively (in 2017: 8.1% and 0.3%), and 6.4% and 0.2% after IUI-D (in 2017: 6.9% and 0.2%). Among 20 994 FP interventions in 16 countries (18 888 in 13 countries in 2017), cryopreservation of ejaculated sperm (n = 10 503, versus 11 112 in 2017) and of oocytes (n = 9123 versus 6588 in 2017) were the most frequently reported.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION
The results should be interpreted with caution as data collection systems and completeness of reporting vary among European countries. Some countries were unable to deliver data about the number of initiated cycles and/or deliveries.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
The 22nd ESHRE data collection on ART, IUI and FP interventions shows a continuous increase of reported treatment numbers and MAR-derived livebirths in Europe. Although it is the largest data collection on MAR in Europe, further efforts towards optimization of both the collection and reporting, with the aim of improving surveillance and vigilance in the field of reproductive medicine, are awaited.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)
The study has received no external funding and all costs are covered by ESHRE. There are no competing interests.
How are ART and IUI regulated, funded and registered in European countries?
Of the 43 countries performing ART and IUI in Europe, and participating in the survey, specific legislation exists in only ...39 countries, public funding (also available in the 39 countries) varies across and sometimes within countries and national registries are in place in 31 countries.
Some information devoted to particular aspects of accessibility to ART and IUI is available, but most is fragmentary or out-dated. Annual reports from the European IVF-Monitoring (EIM) Consortium for ESHRE clearly mirror different approaches in European countries regarding accessibility to and efficacy of those techniques.
A survey was designed using the online SurveyMonkey tool consisting of 55 questions concerning three domains-legal, funding and registry. Answers refer to the countries' situation on 31 December 2018.
All members of EIM plus representatives of countries not yet members of the Consortium were invited to participate. Answers received were checked, and initial responders were asked to address unclear answers and to provide any additional information they considered important. Tables of individual countries resulting from the consolidated data were then sent to members of the Committee of National Representatives of ESHRE, asking for a second check. Conflicting information was clarified by direct contact.
Information was received from 43 out of the 44 European countries where ART and IUI are performed. Thirty-nine countries reported specific legislation on ART, and artificial insemination was considered an ART technique in 35 of them. Accessibility is limited to infertile couples in 11 of the 43 countries. A total of 30 countries offer treatments to single women and 18 to female couples. In five countries ART and IUI are permitted for treatment of all patient groups, being infertile couples, single women and same sex couples, male and female. Use of donated sperm is allowed in 41 countries, egg donation in 38, the simultaneous donation of sperm and egg in 32 and embryo donation in 29. Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) for monogenic disorders or structural rearrangements is not allowed in two countries, and PGT for aneuploidy is not allowed in 11; surrogacy is accepted in 16 countries. With the exception of marital/sexual situation, female age is the most frequently reported limiting criteria for legal access to ART-minimal age is usually set at.
18 years and maximum ranging from 45 to 51 years with some countries not using numeric definition. Male maximum age is set in very few countries. Where permitted, age is frequently a limiting criterion for third-party donors (male maximum age 35 to 55 years; female maximum age 34 to 38 years). Other legal constraints in third-party donation are the number of children born from the same donor (in some countries, number of families with children from the same donor) and, in 10 countries, a maximum number of egg donations. How countries deal with the anonymity is diverse-strict anonymity, anonymity just for the recipients (not for children when reaching legal adulthood age), mixed system (anonymous and non-anonymous donations) and strict non-anonymity.Public funding systems are extremely variable. Four countries provide no financial assistance to patients. Limits to the provision of funding are defined in all the others i.e. age (female maximum age is the most used), existence of previous children, maximum number of treatments publicly supported and techniques not entitled for funding. In a few countries, reimbursement is linked to a clinical policy. The definition of the type of expenses covered within an IVF/ICSI cycle, up to what limit and the proportion of out-of-pocket costs for patients is also extremely dissimilar.National registries of ART and IUI are in place in 31 out of the 43 countries contributing to the survey, and a registry of donors exists in 18 of them.
The responses were provided by well-informed and committed individuals and submitted to double checking. Since no formal validation was in place, possible inaccuracies cannot be excluded. Also, results are a cross section in time and ART and IUI legislations within European countries undergo continuous evolution. Finally, several domains of ART activity were deliberately left out of the scope of this ESHRE survey.
Results of this survey offer a detailed view of the ART and IUI situation in European countries. It provides updated and extensive answers to many relevant questions related to ART usage at national level and could be used by institutions and policymakers in planning services at both national and European levels.
The study has no external funding, and all costs were covered by ESHRE. There were no competing interests.ESHRE Pages are not externally peer reviewed. This article has been approved by the Executive Committee of ESHRE.
Abstract STUDY QUESTION How are ART and IUI regulated, funded, and registered in European countries, and how has the situation changed since 2018? SUMMARY ANSWER Of the 43 countries performing ART ...and IUI in Europe, and participating in the survey, specific legislation exists in only 39 countries, public funding varies across and sometimes within countries (and is lacking or minimal in four countries), and national registries are in place in 33 countries; only a small number of changes were identified, most of them in the direction of improving accessibility, through increased public financial support and/or opening access to additional subgroups. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY The annual reports of the European IVF-Monitoring Consortium (EIM) clearly show the existence of different approaches across Europe regarding accessibility to and efficacy of ART and IUI treatments. In a previous survey, some coherent information was gathered about how those techniques were regulated, funded, and registered in European countries, showing that diversity is the paradigm in this medical field. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A survey was designed using the SurveyMonkey tool consisting of 90 questions covering several domains (legal, funding, and registry) and considering specific details on the situation of third-party donations. New questions widened the scope of the previous survey. Answers refer to the situation of countries on 31 December 2022. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTINGS, METHODS All members of the EIM were invited to participate. The received answers were checked and initial responders were asked to address unclear answers and to provide any additional information considered relevant. Tables resulting from the consolidated data were then sent to members of the Committee of National Representatives of ESHRE, requesting a second check. Conflicting information was clarified by direct contact. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Information was received from 43 out of the 45 European countries where ART and IUI are performed. There were 39 countries with specific legislation on ART, and artificial insemination was considered an ART technique in 33 of them. Accessibility is limited to infertile couples only in 8 of the 43 countries. In 5 countries, ART and IUI are permitted also for treatments of single women and all same sex couples, while a total of 33 offer treatment to single women and 19 offer treatment to female couples. Use of donated sperm is allowed in all except 2 countries, oocyte donation is allowed in 38, simultaneous donation of sperm and oocyte is allowed in 32, and embryo donation is allowed in 29 countries. Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT)-M/SR (for monogenetic disorders, structural rearrangements) is not allowed in 3 countries and PGT-A (for aneuploidy) is not allowed in 10; surrogacy is accepted in 15 countries. Except for marital/sexual situation, female age is the most frequently reported limiting criterion for legal access to ART: minimal age is usually set at 18 years and the maximum ranges from 42 to 54 with some countries not using numeric definition. Male maximum age is set in very few countries. Where third-party donors are permitted, age is frequently a limiting criterion (male maximum age ranging from 35 to 50; female maximum age from 30 to 37). Other legal restrictions in third-party donation are the number of children born from the same donor (or, in some countries, the number of families with children from the same donor) and, in 12 countries, there is a maximum number of oocyte donations. How countries deal with the anonymity is diverse: strict anonymity, anonymity just for the recipients (not for children when reaching legal adulthood age), a mixed system (anonymous and non-anonymous donations), and strict non-anonymity. Inquiring about donors’ genetic screening showed that most countries have enforced either mandatory or scientific recommendations that exclude the most prevalent genetic diseases, although, again, diversity is evident. Reimbursement/compensation systems exist in more than 30 European countries, with around 10 describing clearly defined maximum amounts considered acceptable. Public funding systems are extremely variable. One country provides no financial assistance to ART/IUI patients and three offer only minimal support. Limits to the provision of funding are defined in the others i.e. age (female maximum age is the most used), existence of previous children, BMI, maximum number of treatments publicly supported, and techniques not entitled for funding. In a few countries reimbursement is linked to a clinical policy. The definitions of the type of expenses covered within an IVF/ICSI cycle, up to which limit, and the proportion of out-of-pocket costs for patients are also extremely dissimilar. National registries of ART are in place in 33 out of the 43 countries contributing to the survey and a registry of donors exists in 19 of them. When comparing with the results of the previous survey, the main changes are: (i) an extension of the beneficiaries of ART techniques (and IUI), evident in nine countries; (ii) public financial support exists now in Albania and Armenia; (iii) in Luxembourg, the only ART centre expanded its on-site activities; (iv) donor-conceived children are entitled to know the donor identity in six countries more than in 2018; and (v) four more countries have set a maximum number of oocyte donations. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Although the responses were provided by well-informed and committed individuals and submitted to double checking, no formal validation by official bodies was in place. Therefore, possible inaccuracies cannot be excluded. The results presented are a cross-section in time, and ART and IUI frameworks within European countries undergo continuous modification. Finally, some domains of ART activity were deliberately left out of the scope of this survey. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Our results offer a detailed updated view of the ART and IUI situation in European countries. It provides extensive answers to many relevant questions related to ART usage at the national level and could be used by institutions and policymakers at both national and European levels. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The study has no external funding, and all costs were covered by ESHRE. There were no competing interests.
Does the time elapsed between oocyte pick-up (OPU) and denudation or injection affect the probability of achieving a live birth (LB) in ICSI cycles?
Prolonged oocyte culture before denudation (>4 h) ...was associated with an increase in clinical pregnancy (CP), LB and cumulative LB (CLB) rates when compared with earlier denudation timings.
Oocyte maturation is a complex and dynamic process involving structural and biochemical modifications in the cell necessary to support fertilization and early embryo development. While meiotic competence is easily identifiable by the presence of an extruded first polar body, cytoplasmic maturation cannot be assessed microscopically. Culturing oocytes with their surrounding cumulus cells (CCs) prior to ICSI can enhance the completion of in vitro cytoplasmic maturation; conversely, prolonged culture may induce cell degeneration. The optimal culture intervals prior to oocyte denudation and/or injection have not yet been established and may prove relevant for the improvement of ICSI reproductive outcomes.
This is a single-centre retrospective cohort analysis of 1378 ICSI cycles performed between January 2005 and October 2018. Data were categorized according to: (i) the time interval between OPU and denudation (<3 h, 3-4 h and ≥4 h), (ii) the time interval between denudation and ICSI (<1.5 h, 1.5-2 h, ≥2 h) and (iii) the time interval between OPU and ICSI (<5 h, 5-6 h and ≥6 h). The effect of these timings on fertilization, CP, LB and CLB rates were compared. The culture intervals between different procedures were dependent exclusively on laboratory workload.
ICSI cycles performed in women younger than 40 years old using autologous gametes with at least one metaphase II injected oocyte were included. The effect of oocyte culture duration prior to denudation and injection of the oocytes was compared using multivariable regression accounting for potential confounding variables.
Fertilization and oocyte damage rate after ICSI was found to be independent of the time interval to denudation (<3 h, 3-4 h and ≥4 h) and/or injection (<5 h, 5-6 h and ≥6 h). Extending oocyte culture before denudation significantly improved CP (29.5%, 42.7% and 50.6%, respectively), LB (25.1%, 34.4% and 40.7%, respectively) and CLB rates (26.0%, 36.1% and 42.2%, respectively), particularly if the time interval was at least 4 h. Additionally, LB (31.7%, 35.8% and 27.4%, respectively) and CLB rates (34.2%, 36.6% and 27.7%, respectively) were also dependent on the time from OPU to injection.
This study is limited by its retrospective nature and potential unmeasured confounding cannot be excluded. Furthermore, the effect of even shorter or longer periods of culture before denudation and/or injection were not evaluated and should not be extrapolated from these results.
Our findings propose new evidence of a previously unrecognized protective effect of the CCs-oocyte interactions in human ART, raising the question of a possible downstream effect in embryogenesis which significantly affects LB rates. Additionally, this is the first study to suggest a negative effect of further extending culture before ICSI on LB and CLB rates, thus potentially allowing for the narrowing of an optimal ICSI time interval. Simple strategies such as the establishment of more effective time frames to perform these procedures and adjusting laboratory practice may prove beneficial, ultimately improving ICSI reproductive outcomes.
None.
N/A.
Abstract
In assisted reproductive technology (ART), quality control necessitates the collection of outcome data and occurring complications. Traditional quality assurance is based on data derived ...from single ART centres and more recently from national registries, both recording outcome parameters during well-defined observation periods. Nowadays, ART is moving towards much more diverse approaches, with sequential activities including short- or long-term freezing of gametes, gonadal tissues and embryos, and cross-border reproductive care. Hence, long-term cumulative treatment rates and an international approach are becoming a necessity. We suggest the initiation of an easy access European Reproductive Coding System, through which each ART recipient is allocated a unique reproductive care code. This code would identify individuals (and reproductive material) during case to case data reporting to national ART data collecting institutions and to a central European ART monitoring agency. For confidentiality reasons, the identity of the individuals should remain with the local ART provider. This way, cumulative and fully reliable reproductive outcome data can be constructed with follow-up over prolonged time periods.
PDF
