Risk of cancer after assisted reproduction: a review of the available evidences and guidance to fertility counselors

Infertile women requiring ovarian stimulation and assisted reproduction techniques (ART) are faced with difficult issues. The fear that using hormones could increase their risk of cancer is the most significant. One of the main challenges for assessing cancer risk after ART is the difficulty to separate it from the underlying condition of infertility per se. The delay or the inability to achieve a pregnancy is an important risk factor for breast, endometrial and ovarian cancer. We analyzed the current literature on the topic

Revisión bibliográfica: Complicaciones neonatales y obstétricas derivadas de las técnicas de reproducción asistida y el papel de Enfermería ante ellas.

Introducción: Los problemas de esterilidad y los cambios sociales de nuestro entorno han provocado un aumento de la reproducción asistida, lo que incrementa el riesgo de morbilidad neonatal y obstétrica. Enfermería debe poseer conocimientos óptimos para garantizar la calidad asistencial en el cuidado de ambos. Objetivo: Conocer los problemas de salud derivados de la utilización de la reproducción asistida en la madre y en el hijo. Metodología: Se ha realizado una búsqueda bibliográfica tanto en bases de datos como de forma manual. Se ha fijado el límite temporal en diez años y se ha restringido la búsqueda a los idiomas español e inglés. Desarrollo: Entre las complicaciones neonatales destacan la gestación múltiple, la prematuridad y el bajo peso al nacer. De las complicaciones obstétricas, las más importantes son la gestación múltiple y las secundarias al tratamiento ovulatorio. El papel enfermero debe basarse en la prevención y abordaje de la diabetes gestacional, preeclampsia y síndrome de hiperestimulación ovárica así como en el apoyo emocional y en la educación a la pareja estéril. Conclusión: La gestación múltiple es la complicación neonatal y obstétrica que más problemas de salud genera. Enfermería posee un papel fundamental en la prevención de las complicaciones maternas, en la educación sanitaria y en el apoyo emocional a la pareja durante todo el proceso que dura la reproducción asistida. Palabras clave: Técnicas reproductivas asistidas, fármacos para la fertilidad femenina, síndrome de hiperestimulación ovárica, efectos adversos, atención de Enfermería

Síndrome de hiperestimulación ovárica severo: Informe de caso y revisión de literatura

Introduction: Severe ovarian hyper stimulation syndrome is the most serious complication of ovarian stimulation during the induction of ovulation. Characteristic findings are the presence of increased ovarian volume and ascites in relation to fluid extravasation due to increased capillary permeability whose severity can lead to respiratory failure, renal failure, and hemodynamic collapse and thromboembolic events. Objective: To describe a clinical case of OHSS, along with a review of the literature on the pathology, aimed at the diagnosis and optimal treatment of patients with these clinical characteristics. Case presentation: A 29-year-old patient with a history of polycystic ovarian syndrome who presented severe Severe ovarian hyper stimulation syndrome as a secondary complication to gonadotrophic stimulation. The clinical profile showed enlarged ovaries in the sonographic test; anasarca due to ascites and bilateral pleural effusions and respiratory failures that belong to a respiratory distress type in this adult patient. Paracentesis was performed and noninvasive mechanical ventilation was used, achieving lung expansion with it. Discussion: The analysis of this case was started seven days after the administration of gonadotropin, favored by the patient’s previous conditions, with no lethal complications. Conclusions: Paracentesis may be an effective therapeutic option in the treatment of ascites with compromised lung function. Noninvasive mechanical ventilation is a strategy to avoid intubation in these patients, which avoids the periods of exhaustive sedation and the consequent risk of bronchoaspiration. [Urbina-Contreras ZE, Urbina-Echeverry SE, Lamos-Duarte AF, Picón-Jaimes YA. Severe Ovarian Hyper Stimulation Syndrome: Case Report and Literature Review. MedUNAB 2017; 20(2): 244-251].Introducción: El síndrome de hiperestimulación ovárica severo es la complicación más grave de la estimulación ovárica durante la inducción de la ovulación. Los hallazgos característicos son la presencia de ovarios aumentados de volumen y ascitis en relación a extravasación de líquido por aumento de la permeabilidad capilar, cuya severidad puede llevar a falla respiratoria, renal, colapso hemodinámico y eventos tromboembólicos. Objetivo: Describir un caso clínico de síndrome de hiperestimulación ovárica, junto con una revisión de la literatura sobre la patología, orientada al diagnóstico y tratamiento óptimo de pacientes con estas características clínicas. Presentación del caso: Paciente de 29 años con antecedente de síndrome de ovario poliquístico que presenta síndrome de hiperestimulación ovárica severo como complicación secundaria a estimulación gonadotrófica. El cuadro clínico mostró ovarios aumentados de tamaño en la evaluación sonográfica; anasarca dada por ascitis y derrames pleurales bilaterales e insuficiencia respiratoria tipo distrés respiratorio del adulto. Se realizó paracentesis y se utilizó ventilación mecánica no invasiva, logrando la expansión pulmonar. Discusión: El análisis de este caso se inició siete días después de la administración de gonadotropina, favorecido por las condiciones previas de la paciente, sin complicaciones letales. Conclusiones: La paracentesis puede constituir una opción terapéutica efectiva en el tratamiento de ascitis con compromiso de la función pulmonar. La ventilación mecánica no invasiva es una estrategia para evitar la intubación en estas pacientes lo cual evita los periodos de sedación exhaustivos y el consiguiente riesgo de broncoaspiración. [Urbina-Contreras ZE, Urbina-Echeverry SE, Lamos-Duarte AF, Picón-Jaimes YA. Síndrome de hiperestimulación ovárica severo: Informe de caso y revisión de literatura. MedUNAB 2017; 20(2): 244-251]

In vitro fertilisation for unexplained subfertility

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Chinese herbal medicine for subfertile women with polycystic ovarian syndrome

© 2016 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Background: Polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) is one of the most common reproductive endocrinology abnormalities, and affects 5% to 10% of women of reproductive age. Western medicines, such as oral contraceptives, insulin sensitizers and laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD), have been used to treat PCOS. Recently, many studies have been published that consider Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) as an alternative treatment for women with PCOS. Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of CHM for subfertile women with PCOS. Search methods: We searched sources, including the following databases, from inception to 9 June 2016: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED), PsycINFO, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, Wanfang and trial registries. In addition, we searched the reference lists of included trials and contacted experts in the field to locate trials. Selection criteria: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that considered the use of CHM for the treatment of subfertile women with PCOS. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently screened appropriate trials for inclusion, assessed the risk of bias in included studies and extracted data. We contacted primary study authors for additional information. We conducted meta-analyses. We used the odds ratios (ORs) to report dichotomous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods. Main results: We included five RCTs with 414 participants. The comparisons in the included trials were as follows: CHM versus clomiphene, CHM plus clomiphene versus clomiphene (with or without ethinyloestradiol cyproterone acetate (CEA)), CHM plus follicle aspiration plus ovulation induction versus follicle aspiration plus ovulation induction alone, and CHM plus laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) versus LOD alone. The overall quality of the evidence for most comparisons was very low. None of the included studies reported live birth rate, and only one study reported data on adverse events. When CHM was compared with clomiphene (with or without LOD in both arms), there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in pregnancy rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 5.06; two studies, 90 participants, I2 statistic = 0%, very low quality evidence). No study reported data on adverse events. When CHM plus clomiphene was compared with clomiphene (with or without CEA), there was low quality evidence of a higher pregnancy rate in the CHM plus clomiphene group (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.14; three RCTs, 300 women, I2 statistic = 0%,low quality evidence). No data were reported on adverse events. When CHM with follicle aspiration and ovulation induction was compared with follicle aspiration and ovulation induction alone, there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in pregnancy rates (OR 1.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.52; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence), severe luteinized unruptured follicle syndrome (LUFS) (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.06 to 6.14; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence), ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.00 to 8.19; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence) or multiple pregnancy (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.06 to 6.14; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence). When CHM with LOD was compared with LOD alone, there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates of pregnancy (OR 3.50, 95% CI 0.72 to 17.09; one study, 30 women, very low quality evidence), No data were reported on adverse events. There was no evidence of a difference between any of the comparison groups for any other outcomes. The quality of the evidence for all other comparisons and outcomes was very low. The main limitations in the evidence were failure to report live birth or adverse events, failure to describe study methods in adequate detail and imprecision due to very low event rates and wide CIs. Authors' conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to support the use of CHM for women with PCOS and subfertility. No data are available on live birth, and there is no consistent evidence to indicate that CHM influences fertility outcomes. However there is very limited low quality evidence to suggest that the addition of CHM to clomiphene may improve pregnancy rates. There is insufficient evidence on adverse effects to indicate whether CHM is safe

Oral medications including clomiphene citrate or aromatase inhibitors with gonadotropins for controlled ovarian stimulation in women undergoing in vitro fertilisation

We thank:• Richard Kirubakaran, Cochrane South Asia, Prof. BV Moses Centre for Evidence-Informed Health Care and Health Policy, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India;• Marian Showell, Information Specialist for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group;• Editorial team of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group for their support and assistancePeer reviewedPublisher PD

Is acupuncture an effective treatment for menorrhagia? : systematic review, exploratory randomised trial, qualitative investigation and GP survey

EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo