Search

Study Question: Is there a difference in testicular function in early adulthood between men born with cryptorchidism and men born with normally descended testes?Summary Answer: In men from the general population, a history of cryptorchidism was associated with lower total testis volume and impaired semen quality as well as altered serum levels of reproductive hormones.What Is Known Already: The association between cryptorchidism and testicular function is well documented in studies based on sub-fertile or infertile men recruited from a clinical setting. However, the association has not previously been investigated in men from the general population, who were unselected regarding fertility status.Study Design, Size, Duration: This is a cross-sectional population-based study of 6376 young Danish men examined from 1996 to 2017.Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: This study is based on young men from the greater Copenhagen area, Denmark (median age of 19 years) who were unselected regarding fertility status and semen quality. The young men delivered a semen sample, had a blood sample drawn and underwent a physical examination including assessment of testis volume. Participants completed a questionnaire regarding cryptorchidism at birth, current lifestyle and their mother's pregnancy, after consulting their mother. The differences in markers of testicular function, including testis volume, semen parameters and reproductive hormones between men with and without a history of cryptorchidism were investigated with multiple linear regression analyses.Main Results and the Role Of Chance: The participation rate was 24% for the entire study period. Overall, a history of cryptorchidism was associated with reduced testicular function. In the adjusted models, a history of cryptorchidism was associated with a 3.5 ml lower total testis volume, determined by orchidometer (P < 0.001), 28% lower sperm concentration (95% CI: -37 to -20) and 26% lower inhibin B/FSH ratio (95% CI: -50 to -22) compared to men without a history of cryptorchidism, suggesting a reduced spermatogenetic capacity. Men with a history of cryptorchidism also had a slightly reduced Leydig cell function expressed as a 6% lower testosterone/LH ratio (95% CI: -12 to -0.7). The significant effect sizes and different markers of testicular function pointing in the same direction across the different models based on a large sample size support that the results are not chance findings.Limitations, Reasons For Caution: Information on cryptorchidism at birth and treatment modus was obtained by retrospective self-report, and each participant only delivered one semen sample.Wider Implications Of the Findings: The results suggest that men with a history of cryptorchidism could be at increased risk of experiencing fertility problems. However, among these men there is a wide variation in semen quality and further research is needed in order to identify the subgroup of boys born with cryptorchidism who are at the greatest risk of impaired semen quality when reaching adulthood.Study Funding/competing Interest(s): The study received financial support from the Research fund of Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital; the European Union (Contract numbers BMH4-CT96-0314, QLK4-CT-1999-01422, QLK4-CT-2002-00603. FP7/2007-2013, DEER Grant agreement no. 212844); the Danish Ministry of Health; the Danish Environmental Protection Agency; A.P. Møller and wife Chastine McKinney Møllers Foundation; and Svend Andersens Foundation. None of the founders had any role in the study design, collection, analysis or interpretation of data, writing of the paper or publication decisions. The authors have nothing to declare.Trial Registration Number: N/A. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Question: What is the risk of death among men with oligospermia, unspecified male factor and azoospermia in the years following fertility treatment?Summary Answer: No significantly elevated risk was observed among men with oligospermia and unspecified male factor, while an increased risk was found among men with azoospermia.What Is Known Already: Previous studies have shown associations between male factor infertility and risk of death, but these studies have relied on internal reference groups and the risk of death according to type of male infertility is not well characterized.Study Design, Size, Duration: In this prospective record-linkage cohort study, we identified men who had undergone medically assisted reproduction (MAR) between 1994 and 2015. Data was linked to the Danish causes of death register and sociodemographic registers through personal identification numbers assigned to all Danish citizens at birth.Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: Men that had undergone MAR in Denmark (MAR Cohort; n = 64 563) were identified from the Danish IVF register, which includes data on whether infertility was due to male factor. For each man in the MAR cohort, five age-matched men who became fathers without fertility treatment were selected from the general population (non-MAR fathers; n = 322 108). Men that could not adequately be tracked in the Danish CPR register (n = 1259) and those that were censored prior to study entry (n = 993) were excluded, leaving a final population of 384 419 men. Risk of death was calculated by Cox regression analysis with age as an underlying timeline and adjustments for educational attainment, civil status and year of study entry. The risk of death was compared among men with and without male factor infertility identified from the IVF register (internal comparisons) as well as to the non-MAR fathers (external comparison).Main Results and the Role Of Chance: The risk of death between the MAR cohort (all men, regardless of infertility) and the non-MAR fathers was comparable [hazard ratio (HR), 1.07; 95% CI, 0.98-1.15]. When the MAR cohort was limited to infertile men, these men were at increased risk of death [HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.12-1.44]. However, when stratified by type of male factor infertility, men with azoospermia had the highest risk of death, which persisted when in both the internal [HR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.54-3.41] and external comparison [HR, 3.32; 95% CI, 2.02-5.40]. No significantly elevated risk of death was observed among men with oligospermia [HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.87-1.50] and unspecified male factor [HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.75-1.61] compared with the non-MAR fathers. The same trends were observed for the internal comparison.Limitations, Reasons For Caution: Duration of the follow-up was limited and there is limited generalizability to infertile men who do not seek fertility treatment.Wider Implications Of the Findings: Using national health registers, we found an increased risk of death among azoospermic men while no increased risk was found among men with other types of infertility. For the azoospermic men, further insight into causal pathways is needed to identify options for monitoring and prevention.Study Funding/competing Interest(s): This study is part of the ReproUnion collaborative study, co-financed by the European Union, Interreg V ÖKS. C.G.'s research stay at Stanford was funded by grants from the University of Copenhagen, Kong Christian den Tiendes Fond, Torben og Alice Frimodt Fond and Julie Von Müllen Fond. M.E. is an advisor for Sandstone and Dadi. All other authors declare no conflict of interests.Trial Registration Number: Not relevant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Question: What are the attitudes towards different aspects of a freeze-all strategy and elective frozen embryo transfer (eFET) in comparison with fresh embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology treatment among female and male patients before and after their first ART treatment cycle in a public health care setting?Summary Answer: Despite concerns about the delay in embryo transfer associated with eFET, nearly 60% of the participants were in favor of eFET compared with fresh embryo transfer assuming that the clinical pregnancy rate was equivalent.What Is Known Already: Vitrification and blastocyst transfer have considerably improved success rates after FET with ongoing pregnancy rates in frozen cycles approaching those seen in fresh treatment cycles. Furthermore, the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is essentially eliminated in FET cycles, and FET may be beneficial to the endometrial and fetal development because a hormonal environment mirroring the natural cycle is enabled. However, the freeze-all strategy is not yet implemented as standard care. One reason is the presumption of negative patient attitudes towards a freeze-all embryo strategy. So far, no data regarding patients' attitudes on a freeze-all strategy have been published.Study Design, Size, Duration: This study was designed as a descriptive cross-sectional study including 165 fertility patients referred for their first ART treatment from December 2014 to June 2016.Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: All newly referred patients participating in a mandatory meeting before initiating ART treatment at the Fertility Clinic, Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark were requested to fill in an online web-based questionnaire separately for men and women covering attitudes towards a freeze-all strategy, socio-demographic data and reproductive history. The patients were informed about both conventional fresh embryo transfer strategy and the freeze-all strategy prior to answering the questionnaire.Main Results and the Role Of Chance: The total response rate was 77.1% (n = 165), and for women and men respectively 85.8 versus 66.0%. The female respondents were significantly more likely to consider the postponement of embryo transfer difficult compared to the male population (78.6 versus 35.5%; P < 0.001) and they were significantly more willing to accept a risk in treatment on own health to achieve a pregnancy than were the male respondents on their partners health (82.5 versus 96.8%; P = 0.025). However, 59.2% of the women and 59.7% of the men agreed that they would choose eFET over fresh embryo transfer if the chance of pregnancy were the same. Most of the patients furthermore agreed that the health of the mother and their baby was of highest importance. In the adjusted analyses we found no significant predictive factors for preferences towards a freeze-all strategy apart from a negative attitude towards delay of transfer in case of previous unsuccessful ART attempts.Limitations, Reasons For Caution: Selection bias cannot be excluded, as the total response rate was 77.1%. The hypothetical nature of the items may furthermore limit the validity of the results. In addition, the participants were from a single Fertility Clinic in the Capital Region of Denmark and may therefore not be representative for all fertility patients.Wider Implications Of the Findings: In a clinical setting with similar pregnancy rates for eFET and fresh embryo transfer, these results indicate that patients, when given access to information on advantages and disadvantages of both fresh embryo transfer and eFET, are less prone to opt for fresh embryo transfer. This may be ground breaking for a patient-centered paradigm shift in routine ART treatment with a wider implementation of a freeze-all and eFET-strategy eliminating the risk of OHSS.Study Funding/competing Interest(s): The Danish Council for Independent Research and Merck Serono supported the study. The study is part of the Reprounion Collaborative study, co-financed by the European Union, Interreg V ÖKS. No competing interests exist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]