Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2010
Evaluating the necessity for universal screening of prospective oocyte donors using enhanced genetic and psychological testing.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Reh Andrea, Amarosa Alana, Licciardi Frederick, Krey Lewis, Berkeley Alan S, Kump Lisa
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To minimize the potential for harmful inheritable conditions, donors are rigorously screened according to standard guidelines, yet such guidelines may not be sufficient to exclude egg donors with certain known inheritable conditions. We compared universal screening of oocyte donors with Tay-Sachs, Fragile X, karyotype and Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) versus standard American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) guidelines that do not include such testing.
METHODS: In this 12 year retrospective cohort study, results of enhanced universal screening of all anonymous oocyte donor candidates from 1997 to 2008 at a university hospital oocyte donation program were reviewed. Primary outcomes were the frequency of oocyte donor candidates excluded as a result of enhanced universal screening (Tay-Sachs, Fragile X, karyotypic analysis and MMPI-2) versus basic screening according to ASRM guidelines.
RESULTS: Of 1303 candidates who underwent on-site evaluation, 47% passed the screening process, 23% were lost to follow-up and 31% were excluded. Genetic and psychological factors accounted for the most common reasons for candidate exclusion. Enhanced genetic screening excluded an additional 25 candidates (19% of all genetic exclusions) and enhanced psychological screening excluded an additional 15 candidates (12% of all psychological exclusions). Altogether enhanced screening accounted for 40 candidates (10%) of the total pool of excluded candidates.
CONCLUSIONS: Although our study is limited by its retrospective nature and center-specific conclusions, we show that enhanced comprehensive screening can exclude a significant number of candidates from an oocyte donor program and should be encouraged to assure optimal short-term and long-term outcomes for pregnancies achieved through oocyte donation.
METHODS: In this 12 year retrospective cohort study, results of enhanced universal screening of all anonymous oocyte donor candidates from 1997 to 2008 at a university hospital oocyte donation program were reviewed. Primary outcomes were the frequency of oocyte donor candidates excluded as a result of enhanced universal screening (Tay-Sachs, Fragile X, karyotypic analysis and MMPI-2) versus basic screening according to ASRM guidelines.
RESULTS: Of 1303 candidates who underwent on-site evaluation, 47% passed the screening process, 23% were lost to follow-up and 31% were excluded. Genetic and psychological factors accounted for the most common reasons for candidate exclusion. Enhanced genetic screening excluded an additional 25 candidates (19% of all genetic exclusions) and enhanced psychological screening excluded an additional 15 candidates (12% of all psychological exclusions). Altogether enhanced screening accounted for 40 candidates (10%) of the total pool of excluded candidates.
CONCLUSIONS: Although our study is limited by its retrospective nature and center-specific conclusions, we show that enhanced comprehensive screening can exclude a significant number of candidates from an oocyte donor program and should be encouraged to assure optimal short-term and long-term outcomes for pregnancies achieved through oocyte donation.