Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37404308›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2023

Ovarian stimulation and oocyte cryopreservation in females and transgender males aged 18 years or less: a systematic review.

Marnie Slonim, Michelle Peate, Kira Merigan, Daniel Lantsberg, Richard A Anderson, Kate Stern, Debra Gook, Yasmin Jayasinghe

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Marnie SlonimOncofertility Program and Department of Gynaecology, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Michelle PeateDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Royal Women's Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Kira MeriganDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Daniel LantsbergMelbourne IVF, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Richard A AndersonMRC Centre for Reproductive Health, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Kate SternDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Debra GookDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Royal Women's Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Yasmin JayasingheOncofertility Program and Department of Gynaecology, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Myer Foundation · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AUMRC Centre for Reproductive Health · GBRoyal Children's Hospital · AURoyal Women's Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Fertility preservation is an important healthcare focus in the paediatric and adolescent population when gonadotoxic treatments are required. Ovarian stimulation (OS) resulting in oocyte cryopreservation is a well-established fertility preservation option in the adult population. It's utility, however, is little known in young patients. The purpose of this review was to synthesise the available literature on OS in patients ≤18 years old, to identify gaps in current research and provide suggestions for future research directions. Methods: Using PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review of the literature was performed for all relevant full-text articles published in English in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Google Scholar databases. The search strategy used a combination of subject headings and generic terms related to the study topic and population. Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Characteristics of the studies, objectives and key findings were extracted and summarised in a narrative synthesis. Results: Database search and manual review identified 922 studies, 899 were eliminated based on defined exclusion criteria. Twenty-three studies were included and comprised 468 participants aged ≤18 years who underwent OS (median 15.2, range 7-18 years old). Only three patients were premenarchal, and four patients were on treatment to suppress puberty. Patients had OS for a broad range of indications including oncology treatment, transgender care and Turner syndrome. A total of 488 cycles of OS were completed, with all but 18 of these cycles (96.3%) successfully resulting in cryopreserved mature oocytes (median 10 oocytes, range 0-35). Fifty-three cycles (9.8%) were cancelled. Complications were rare (<1%). One pregnancy was reported from a female who had OS aged 17 years old. Conclusion: This systematic review demonstrates that OS and oocyte cryopreservation is achievable in young females however there are only a few cases in the literature describing OS in premenarcheal children or those who have suppressed puberty. There is little proof that OS can lead to pregnancy in adolescents, and no proof that this can be achieved in premenarchal girls. Therefore it should be regarded as an innovative procedure for adolescents and experimental for premenarcheal girls. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=265705, identifier CRD42021265705.

Indexed as

Transgender PersonsCryopreservationFemaleHumansMaleOocytesOvulation InductionPregnancySexual Maturationfertility preservationoncofertilityoocyte cryopreservationoocyteretrievalovarian hyperstimulationovarian stimulation (OS)paediatric and adolescent gynaecologypaediatric oncofertility

Identifiers

PMID37404308
PMCPMC10315913
OpenAlexW4381165096

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.