scholarly journals Oocyte and Sperm Cryopreservation In Oncological Patients During Covid-19 Pandemic

Cryobiology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 103 ◽  
pp. 204
Author(s):  
Eleonora Porcu ◽  
Linda Cipriani ◽  
Maria Dirodi ◽  
Nilla Calza ◽  
Patrizia Maria Ciotti ◽  
...  
Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (9) ◽  
pp. 946
Author(s):  
George Anifandis ◽  
Tyl H Taylor ◽  
Christina I Messini ◽  
Katerina Chatzimeletiou ◽  
Alexandros Daponte ◽  
...  

Cryopreservation of human gametes and embryos as well as human reproductive tissues has been characterized as an essential process and aspect of assisted reproductive technology (ART). Notably, sperm cryopreservation is a fundamental aspect of cryopreservation in oncological patients or patients undergoing gonadotoxic treatment. Given that there is a risk of contamination or cross-contamination, either theoretical or real, during the procedures of cryopreservation and cryostorage, both the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) have provided updated guidelines for preventing or reducing the contamination risk of sexually transmitted viruses. Given the ongoing and worldwide COVID-19 pandemic, there is considerable interest in what measures should be taken to mitigate SARS-CoV-2 contamination during cryopreservation and cryostorage of semen samples. The SARS-CoV-2 virus is the virus that causes COVID-19, and whose transmission and infection is mainly aerosol-mediated. Several ART professional societies, including ESHRE and ASRM have proposed measures to mitigate the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Whether the proposed safety directives are enough to mitigate the possible SARS-CoV-2-contamination of sperm samples during cryopreservation or whether the policies should be re-evaluated will be discussed in this review. Additionally, insights regarding the possible impact of COVID-19 vaccination on the safety of sperm cryopreservation will be discussed.


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 500-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiromitsu Negoro ◽  
Yoshiyuki Matsui ◽  
Takahiro Nakayama ◽  
Hiroshi Hatayama ◽  
Osamu Ogawa ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 85 (3) ◽  
pp. 640-645 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcos Meseguer ◽  
Nancy Molina ◽  
Juan A. García-Velasco ◽  
Jose Remohí ◽  
Antonio Pellicer ◽  
...  

2004 ◽  
Vol 82 ◽  
pp. S176
Author(s):  
M. Meseguer ◽  
N. Garrido ◽  
N. Molina ◽  
B. Gadea ◽  
J. Remohi ◽  
...  

1999 ◽  
Vol 38 (04) ◽  
pp. 108-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
H.-J. Kaiser ◽  
U. Cremerius ◽  
O. Sabri ◽  
M. Schreckenberger ◽  
P. Reinartz ◽  
...  

Summary Aim of the present study was to investigate the feasibility of 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) imaging in oncological patients with a dual head gamma camera modified for coincidence detection (MCD). Methods: Phantom studies were done to determine lesion detection at various lesion-to-background ratios, system sensitivity and spatial resolution. Thirty-two patients with suspected or known malignant disease were first studied with a dedicated full-ring PET system (DPET) applying measured attenuation correction and subsequently with an MCD system without attenuation correction. MCD images were first interpreted without knowledge of the DPET findings. In a second reading, MCD and DPET were evaluated simultaneously. Results: The phantom studies revealed a comparable spatial resolution for DPET and MCD (5.9 × 6.3 × 4.2 mm vs. 5.9 × 6.5 × 6.0 mm). System sensitivity of MCD was less compared to DPET (91 cps/Bq/ml/cmF0V vs. 231 cps/ Bq/ml/cmFOv). At a lesion-to-background ratio of 4:1, DPET depicted a minimal phantom lesion of 1.0 cm in diameter, MCD a minimal lesion of 1.6 cm. With DPET, a total of 91 lesions in 27 patients were classified as malignant. MCD without knowledge of DPET results revealed increased FDG uptake in all patients with positive DPET findings. MCD detected 72 out of 91 DPET lesions (79.1 %). With knowledge of the DPET findings, 11 additional lesions were detected (+12%). MCD missed lesions in six patients with relevance for staging in two patients. All lesions with a diameter above 18 mm were detected. Conclusion: MCD FDG imaging yielded results comparable to dedicated PET in most patients. However, a considerable number of small lesions clearly detectable with DPET were not detected by MCD alone. Therefore, MCD cannot yet replace dedicated PET in all oncological FDG studies. Further technical refinement of this new method is needed to improve image quality (e.g. attenuation correction).


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 139
Author(s):  
V. A. Cherkasov ◽  
B. I. Dolgushin ◽  
Iu. G. Andreev ◽  
O. V. Somonova
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document