Solved problems of reproductive medicine in the Czech Republic 2020


Authors: Ventruba P. 1;  Žáková J. 1;  Řežábek K. 2;  Veselá K. 3;  Tauwinklová G. 3;  Trávník P. 3;  Ješeta M. 1;  Mardešić T. 4;  Crha I. 1;  Jelínková L. 4;  Rumpík D. 5
Authors‘ workplace: Gynekologicko-porodnická klinika LF MU a FN Brno 1;  Gynekologicko-porodnická klinika 1. LF UK a VFN v Praze 2;  REPROMEDA Biology Park, Brno 3;  PRONATAL Sanatorium, Praha 4;  Klinika reprodukční medicíny a gynekologie, Zlín 5
Published in: Ceska Gynekol 2021; 86(2): 140-147
Category:
doi: 10.48095/cccg2021140

Overview

Introduction: During the 30th symposium of assisted reproduction held on November 11, 2020 in Brno, the solved problems in reproductive medicine in the Czech Republic in 2020 were presented. The selected topics have concerned not only current issues in the field of clinical embryology and genetics as well as gynecology, but also legislation and ethics. Discussed topics: 1. How much time does the doctor have in the CAR (centrum of assisted reproduction) outpatient clinic per patient and how does the embryologist communicate with clients? 2. Reproduction and PGT-M in oncology patients and patients at risk with hereditary oncogenic mutations. 3. Non-invasive genetic testing of embryos from culture medium. 4. Genome editing. 5. What is the need to monitor hormonal levels in stimulation protocols? 6. Monitoring and embryo selection for transfer/kryo. 7. Is it time to change the law on donor remuneration? Methods: The topics were prepared in advance by authorized members of our company with the task of elaborating theses, which they presented in a separate conference block. The presentation and the discussion were broadcast directly from the broadcast studio at Hotel International via an online connection. After the conference, all discussion topics and comments were incorporated. Conclusion: The work presents the state of the solved problems of reproductive medicine in the Czech Republic.

Keywords:

current topics – assisted reproduction – in vitro fertilisation – reproductive medicine – PGT – genome editing – embryo monitoring


Sources

1. Vuković P, Kasum M, Raguž J et al. Fertility preservation in young women with early-stage breast cancer. Acta Clin Croat 2019; 58(1): 147–156. doi: 10.20471/ acc.2019.58.01.19.

2. National Cancer Institute – Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program. Cancer stat facts: female breast cancer. 2017 [online]. Available from: http:/ / seer.cancer.gov/ statfacts/ html/ breast.html.

3. Kasum M, Beketić-Orešković L, Orešković S. Subsequent pregnancy and prognosis in breast cancer survivors. Acta Clin Croat 2014; 53(3): 334–341.

4. Lambertini M, Del Mastro L, Pescio MC et al. Cancer and fertility preservation: international recommendations from an expert meeting. BMC Med 2016; 14: 1. doi: 10.1186/ s12916-015-0545-7.

5. Blumenfeld Z. How to preserve fertility in young women exposed to chemotherapy? The role of GnRH agonist cotreatment in addition to cryopreservation of embryo, oocytes, or ovaries. Oncologist 2007; 12(9): 1044–1054. doi: 10.1634/ theoncologist.12-9-1044.

6. Yeung QS, Zhang YX, Chung JP et al. A prospective study of non-invasive preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (NiPGT-A) using next-generation sequencing (NGS) on spent culture media (SCM). J Assist Reprod Genet 2019; 36(8): 1609–1621. doi: 10.1007/ s10 815-019-01517-7.

7. Lledo B, Morales R, Ortiz JA et al. Consistent results of non-invasive PGT-A of human embryos using two different techniques for chromosomal analysis. Reprod Biomed Online 2021; 42(3): 555–563. doi: 10.1016/ j.rbmo.2020.10.021.

8. Doudna JA. The promise and challenge of therapeutic genome editing. Nature 2020; 578(7794): 229–236. doi: 10.1038/ s41586-020-1978-5.

9. Lander ES, Baylis F, Zhang F et al. Adopt a moratorium on heritable genome editing. Nature 2019; 567(7747): 165–168. doi: 10.1038/ d415 86-019-00726-5.

10. Fauser BC, Devroey P. Reproductive bio­logy and IVF: ovarian stimulation and luteal phase consequences. Trends Endocrinol Metab 2003; 14(5): 236–242. doi: 10.1016/ s1043-2760(03)00075-4.

11. Yovich J, Conceicao JL, Stanger JD. Mid-luteal serum progesterone concentration govern implantation rates for cryopreserved embryo transfers conducted under hormone replacement. Reprod Biomed Online 2015; 31(2): 180–191. doi: 10.1016/ j.rbmo.2015.05.005.

12. Thomsen LH, Kesmodel US, Erb K et al. The impact of luteal serum progesterone levels on live birth rates – a prospective study of 602 IVF/ ICSI cycles. Hum Reprod 2018; 33(8): 1506–1516. doi: 10.1093/ humrep/ dey226.

13. Lewis WH, Gregory PW. Cinematographs of living developing rabbit-eggs. Science 1929; 69(1782): 226–229. doi: 10.1126/ science.69. 1782.226-a.

14. Pribenszky C, Nilselid AM, Montag M. Time-lapse culture with morphokinetic embryo selection improves pregnancy and live birth chances and reduces early pregnancy loss: a meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed Online 2017; 35(5): 511–520. doi: 10.1016/ j.rbmo.2017.06.022.

15. Armstrong S, Bhide P, Jordan V et al. Time-lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 5(5): CD011320. doi: 10.1002/ 14651858.CD011320.pub4.

16. Reignier A, Girard JM, Lammers J et al. Performance of day 5 KIDScore™ morphokinetic prediction models of implantation and live birth after single blastocyst transfer. J Assist Reprod Genet 2019; 36(11): 2279–2285. doi: 10.1007/ s10815-019-01567-x.

17. Rumpíková T, Oborná I, Belasková S et al. The attitudes of IVF patients treated in the Czech Republic towards informing children born after gamete donation. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub 2018; 162(1): 26–31. doi: 10.5507/ bp.2017.050.

18. Rumpík D, Rumpíková T, Pohanka M et al. Gestational surrogacy in the Czech Republic. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub 2019; 163(2): 155–160. doi: 10.5507/ bp.2018.040.

19. Rumpík D, Rumpíková T, Ventruba P et al. Surogátní mateřství v České republice – naše praktické zkušenosti. In: Ptáček R, Bartůněk P (eds). Kontroverze současné medicíny. Praha: Mladá fronta 2016: 89–94.

20. Ventruba P, Žáková J, Trávník P et al. Aktuální otázky asistované reprodukce v České republice. Ceska Gynekol 2013; 78(4): 392–398.

21. Ventruba P, Žáková J, Ješeta M et al. Současná témata reprodukční medicíny v České republice. Ceska Gynekol 2016; 81(3): 234–240

Labels
Paediatric gynaecology Gynaecology and obstetrics Reproduction medicine

Article was published in

Czech Gynaecology

Issue 2

2021 Issue 2

Most read in this issue
Login
Forgotten password

Don‘t have an account?  Create new account

Forgotten password

Enter the email address that you registered with. We will send you instructions on how to set a new password.

Login

Don‘t have an account?  Create new account