Vitamin D and assisted reproduction Technologies : current concepts

Accumulating evidence from animal and human studies suggests that vitamin D is involved in many functions of the human reproductive system in both genders, but no comprehensive analysis of the potential relationship between vitamin D status and Assisted Reproduction Technologies (ART) outcomes is currently available. On this basis, the purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to perform an in-depth evaluation of clinical studies assessing whether vitamin D status of patients undergoing ART could be related to cycle outcome variables. This issue is of interest considering that vitamin D deficiency is easily amenable to correction and oral vitamin D supplementation is cheap and without significant side effects. Surprisingly, no studies are currently available assessing vitamin D status among male partners of couples undergoing ART, while seven studies on vitamin D status of women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) for ART were found and included in the review. Results show that vitamin D deficiency is highly prevalent among women undergoing COH, ranging from 21% to 31% across studies conducted in Western countries and reaching 75-99% in Iranian studies. Data on vitamin D deficiency (25-hydroxyvitamin D serum levels <20 ng/ml) in relation to ART outcomes could be extracted from three studies and included in the meta-analysis, yielding a common risk ratio (RR) of 0.89 (95% CI 0.53-1.49) and showing a lower but not statistically significant likelihood of clinical pregnancy for vitamin-D-deficient women compared with vitamin-D-sufficient patients. In conclusion, there is insufficient evidence to support the routine assessment of vitamin D status to predict the clinical pregnancy rate in couples undergoing ART. The partly conflicting results of the available studies, potentially explaining the lack of statistical significance for a negative influence of vitamin D deficiency on clinical pregnancy rate, are likely secondary to confounders and insufficient sample size, and further larger cohort and randomised controlled studies are required

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Frozen IVF Cycles to Circumvent the Hormonal Storm on Endometrium

Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) determines an anticipation of endometrial maturation and a premature occurrence of the implantation window, as shown by histological, histochemical, and molecular studies and indirectly by clinical trials. There is growing agreement that in patients hyper-responding to COH and in those undergoing transfer at the blastocyst stage, deferring the transfer in a subsequent frozen cycle could increase pregnancy outcomes. For blastocysts, implantation after a fresh transfer may be limited as the implantation window is already closed while, in hyper-responders to COH, the anticipation magnitude could be more marked thus hampering implantation also for cleavage-stage embryos. Research should focus in depth on pregnancy outcomes and on the most suitable modality to prepare the endometrium for frozen transfers

The Promise and Pitfalls of AI-Generated Anatomical Images: Evaluating Midjourney for Aesthetic Surgery Applications.

The rapid advancement of generative artificial intelligence (AI) systems, such as Midjourney, has paved the way for their use in medical training, producing computer-generated images. However, despite clear disclosures stating that these images are not intended for medical consultations, their accuracy and realism are yet to be thoroughly examined. A series of requests were addressed to the Midjourney AI tool, a renowned generative artificial intelligence application, with a focus on depicting appropriate systemic anatomy and representing aesthetic surgery operations. Subsequently, a blinded panel of four experts, with years of experience in anatomy and aesthetic surgery, assessed the images based on three parameters: accuracy, anatomical correctness, and visual impact. Each parameter was scored on a scale of 1-5. All of images produced by Midjourney exhibited significant inaccuracies and lacked correct anatomical representation. While they displayed high visual impact, their unsuitability for medical training and scientific publications became evident. The implications of these findings are multifaceted. Primarily, the images' inaccuracies render them ineffective for training, leading to potential misconceptions. Additionally, their lack of anatomical correctness limits their applicability in scientific articles. Although the study focuses on a single AI tool, it underscores the need for collaboration between AI developers and medical professionals. The potential integration of accurate medical databases could refine the precision of such AI tools in the future. This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266