Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40188142›Full record

ArticleReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2025

Ovarian tissue cryopreservation for fertility preservation: a two-decade single-center experience with 451 children and adolescents.

Norah L A Emrich, Rebekka Einenkel, Cara Maria Färber, Andreas Schallmoser, Nicole Sänger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Cryopreservation of Ovarian Cortex Tissue.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Oncofertility in Prepubertal Girls: A Qualitative Study of Canadian and French Pediatric Oncologists' Perspectives on Ovarian Tissue Cryopreservation.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2025
    Article
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

5 authors.

Norah L A EmrichDepartment of Gynecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, University Hospital of Bonn, Venusberg Campus 1, Bonn, 53127, Germany. norah.emrich@ukbonn.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1705-1536
Rebekka EinenkelDepartment of Gynecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, University Hospital of Bonn, Venusberg Campus 1, Bonn, 53127, Germany.
Cara Maria FärberDepartment of Gynecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, University Hospital of Bonn, Venusberg Campus 1, Bonn, 53127, Germany.
Andreas SchallmoserDepartment of Gynecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, University Hospital of Bonn, Venusberg Campus 1, Bonn, 53127, Germany.
Nicole SängerDepartment of Gynecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, University Hospital of Bonn, Venusberg Campus 1, Bonn, 53127, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOvarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC) is the only fertility preservation option for premenarcheal girls before gonadotoxic treatment, but is still considered to be experimental in pediatric patients. This study investigated storage behaviors across different age groups to refine counseling approaches for pediatric patients.

methodsThis retrospective study analyzed data from children (0-14 years), adolescents (15-19 years), and adults (≥ 20 years) who underwent OTC between 2000-2021 at the University Hospital Bonn's cryobank. Comparison to adults (age ≥ 20 years) was conducted.

resultsOf 2,475 patients, 6% were children and 12% adolescents. Sarcoma was most common in children, lymphoma in adolescents. Adults had longer active storage than children (5.5 vs. 4.7 years, p = 0.011), but for active storage ≥ 10 years, children and adolescents stored longer than adults (13.1 and 12.6 vs. 11.8 years, p ≤ 0.01). The proportion of adolescents increased, while that of children decreased in long-term storage. Median ovarian cortex surface before cryopreservation was 3.5 cm

conclusionsChildren and adolescents represent a small subset of OTC patients, with indications linked to common pediatric malignancies. For active storage ≥ 10 years, they store longer than adults, likely due to delayed reproduction or awaiting in vitro growth / in vitro maturation in hematological cases. Overall, adults store longer, but adolescent storage has risen over time possibly due to higher child mortality and previously limited OTC use in younger patients. Mean ovarian cortex surface data may guide pediatric tissue harvest recommendations, with unilateral oophorectomy advised. Fertility preservation counseling and cost coverage should be standard for pediatric patients undergoing gonadotoxic treatment. A tailored approach to OTC indications is essential, especially in high-mortality cancers like leukemia or sarcoma. Favorable pregnancy rates observed, even without OTT, suggest possible OTC overutilization, highlighting the need for individualized strategies and careful clinical decision-making to balance risks and preserve reproductive potential.

Indexed as

CryopreservationFertility PreservationOvaryAdolescentAdultChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornPregnancyPregnancy RateRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultAdolescentsChildrenFertility preservationGonadotoxic treatmentMortality rateOvarian tissue cryopreservationPrimary ovarian insufficiencyStorage behaviorStorage durationVitrification

Identifiers

PMID40188142
PMCPMC11971754

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.