...
首页> 外文期刊>Seminars in reproductive medicine >Transitioning from Infertility-Based (ART 1.0) to Elective (ART 2.0) Use of Assisted Reproductive Technologies and the DOHaD Hypothesis: Do We Need to Change Consenting?
【24h】

Transitioning from Infertility-Based (ART 1.0) to Elective (ART 2.0) Use of Assisted Reproductive Technologies and the DOHaD Hypothesis: Do We Need to Change Consenting?

机译:从基于不孕症的(第1.0款)的转换到选修(第2.0款)使用辅助生殖技术和博士假设:我们是否需要改变同意?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The use of assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) has increased significantly in recent years. While this is partially due to improved access for infertile patients, another contribution to the growth of ART utilization is represented by individuals without infertility, who electively chose to freeze their gametes and embryos for future use, before ever attempting conception spontaneously. Overall, the safety of ART for parents and children is well described and the risks are modest. However, while long-term health consequences for offspring as postulated by the Developmental Origin of Health and Disease (DOHaD) hypothesis are unknown, numerous animal studies suggest a predisposition for chronic diseases like hypertension and glucose intolerance. In this article, we argue that a key difference exists between infertile patients, who need to use ART as the only means to achieve pregnancy, and (likely) fertile patients who elect to use ART techniques as a family planning option. We believe that these two sets of patients are different and their risks-benefit ratios are different. We propose that while all patients should be aware of the risks, patients planning to utilize ART techniques without a diagnosis of infertility should be encouraged to think critically about the additional risks, particularly the potential long-term risks that may be imposed from these elective procedures.
机译:近年来,使用辅助生殖技术(艺术品)显着增加。虽然这部分是由于改善的不孕症的进入,但是对艺术利用率的增长的另一个贡献由没有不孕的个体代表,他们在自发地尝试概念之前,他们选择冻结他们的配子和胚胎以冻结他们的配子和胚胎。总体而言,父母和儿童的艺术安全良好描述,风险适度。然而,虽然由健康和疾病发育起源(Dohad)假设的后代的后代的长期健康后果未知,但许多动物研究表明慢性疾病等高血压和葡萄糖不耐受的易感性。在本文中,我们认为不需要使用艺术的患者之间存在关键差异,作为实现怀孕的唯一手段,以及(可能)选择使用艺术技术作为家庭规划选项的肥沃患者。我们认为这两套患者是不同的,其风险效益比例不同。我们提出,虽然所有患者都应该了解风险,但计划利用艺术技术的患者应鼓励在没有诊断不孕症的情况下,批判性地思考额外的风险,特别是可能征收这些选修课的潜在的长期风险。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号