ArticleJournal of pediatric surgery2024
Is Routine Pathology Evaluation of Tissue Removed for Fertility Preservation Necessary?
Article in Journal of pediatric surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- ESHRE good practice recommendations on fertility preservation involving testicular tissue cryopreservation in children receiving gonadotoxic therapies†.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2025Guideline
- Fertility Preservation in Female Children and Adolescent Cancer Patients.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Fertility preservation by ovarian tissue cryopreservation of children in China--umbilical single-incision surgery and perioperative experience.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFor all fertility preservation (FP) cases at our institution, a biopsy is performed for routine pathology from all gonadal tissue removed. This is not standard at all centers. We reviewed our experience with biopsy for pathological evaluation of ovarian and testicular specimens in FP cases to determine clinical utility.
methodsThe medical records of individuals who underwent ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC) or testicular tissue cryopreservation (TTC) between 2011 and 2023 were retrospectively reviewed under an IRB-approved study at a free-standing tertiary care children's hospital. Patient demographics, diagnosis, operative characteristics, and pathology results were collected.
resultsOne-hundred and eighty-three patients underwent OTC, and 134 patients underwent TTC. All patients had their gonadal tissue biopsied for routine pathology. Malignancy was identified in the biopsies of 4 OTC patients (2.2%) and 2 TTC patients (1.5%). Two OTC patients (1.1%) and 2 TTC patients (1.5%) did not have germ cells identified in their biopsy. All OTC and TTC patients and families elected to continue storing tissue for FP after discussion of pathology findings.
conclusionsPathology results provide another data point to help inform patients and their families when making decisions on ovarian or testicular tissue storage and on how tissue may be utilized in the future to restore fertility and/or hormones. There is a low rate of identifying malignancy in gonadal tissue biopsies taken from FP specimens even in patients with known malignancy. However, when malignancy was identified, it could be unexpected and alter the diagnosis and treatment plan significantly for patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.