HIV-affected couples and individuals who desire children should be offered options for safer conception

Introduction: With increasing life expectancy, couples with at least one partner afflicted with HIV are more commonly pursuing the opportunity to have biologic offspring. Currently, there are no universally accepted recommendations regarding first line reproductive treatments for HIV serodiscordant couples lacking a history of infertility. We strongly believe that fertility care intervention should be the first line treatment, when affordably accessible, over natural conception for HIV serodiscordant couples to achieve pregnancy in a safe and efficacious manner. Discussion: In the era of highly active anti-retroviral therapy, in combination with timed intercourse and pre-exposure prophylaxis for the HIV negative partner, some members of the medical community are arguing in favour of natural conception as a means of achieving pregnancy in this patient population. In our opinion, laboratory assisted fertility methods, including intrauterine insemination, in vitro fertilization, and intracytoplasmic sperm injection with semen washing should be the first line treatment recommendation for HIV serodiscordant couples desiring pregnancy for the following reasons: (1) abundance of evidence in the medical literature supporting the safety profile and efficacy of fertility care intervention in couples with HIV; paucity of data addressing safety of natural conception in comparison to fertility intervention techniques (2) unknown public health impact of promoting natural conception as a safe means of achieving pregnancy (3) ethical implications: patients should be offered the available and accessible treatment option posing the lowest possible known risk to the uninfected partner. Conclusions: We believe that physician assisted fertility care, when affordably accessible, should be the treatment of choice over natural conception. While the preliminary data on natural conception in couples using highly active anti-retroviral therapy/pre-exposure prophylaxis/timed intercourse appears promising, we believe that this approach should be limited to patients in resource poor settings where more sophisticated measures do not exist or for patients that simply cannot afford subspecialty care. There are likely to be unknown psychological and behavioural factors impacted by promoting natural conception and diminishing the importance of safe sex practices. Additionally, it is our moral obligation to patients to offer the affordably accessible treatment interventions that pose the least known risk when considering reproductive options.