Acute portal vein thrombosis complicating in vitro fertilization

Recommendations for good practice in ultrasound: oocyte pick up†

STUDY QUESTION

What is good practice in ultrasound (US), and more specifically during the different stages of transvaginal oocyte retrieval, based on evidence in the literature and expert opinion on US practice in ART?

SUMMARY ANSWER

This document provides good practice recommendations covering technical aspects of US-guided transvaginal oocyte retrieval (oocyte pick up: OPU) formulated by a group of experts after considering the published data, and including the preparatory stage of OPU, the actual procedure and post-procedure care.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

US-guided transvaginal OPU is a widely performed procedure, but standards for best practice are not available.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

A working group (WG) collaborated on writing recommendations on the practical aspects of transvaginal OPU. A literature search for evidence of the key aspects of the procedure was carried out. Selected papers (n = 190) relevant to the topic were analyzed by the WG.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

The WG members considered the following key points in the papers: whether US practice standards were explained; to what extent the OPU technique was described and whether complications or incidents and how to prevent such events were reported. In the end, only 108 papers could be used to support the recommendations in this document, which focused on transvaginal OPU. Laparoscopic OPU, transabdominal OPU and OPU for IVM were outside the scope of the study.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

There was a scarcity of studies on the actual procedural OPU technique. The document presents general recommendations for transvaginal OPU, and specific recommendations for its different stages, including prior to, during and after the procedure. Most evidence focussed on comparing different equipment (needles) and on complications and risks, including the risk of infection. For these topics, the recommendations were largely based on the results of the studies. Recommendations are provided on equipment and materials, possible risks and complications, audit and training. One of the major research gaps was training and competence. This paper has also outlined a list of research priorities (including clarification on the value or full blood count, antibiotic prophylaxis and flushing, and the need for training and proficiency).

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

The recommendations of this paper were mostly based on clinical expertise, as at present, only a few clinical trials have focused on the oocyte retrieval techniques, and almost all available data are observational. In addition, studies focusing on OPU were heterogeneous with significant difference in techniques used, which made drafting conclusions and recommendations based on these studies even more challenging.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

These recommendations complement previous guidelines on the management of good laboratory practice in ART. Some useful troubleshooting/checklist recommendations are given for easy implementation in clinical practice. These recommendations aim to contribute to the standardization of a rather common procedure that is still performed with great heterogeneity.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The meetings of the WG were funded by ESHRE. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NA.ESHRE Pages content is not externally peer reviewed. The manuscript has been approved by the Executive Committee of ESHRE.

Assisted Reproductive Techniques in a Patient with History of Venous Thromboembolism: A Case Report and Review of Literature

We report a patient with a history of venous thrombosis following oral contraceptive pills who was planned for in vitro fertilization (IVF)-intracytoplasmic sperm injection for male factor infertility. This article discusses the mechanisms for predisposition to thrombosis during assisted reproduction in patients at high risk. Assessment of risk before commencement of treatment, use of mild stimulation, antagonist protocol, avoiding ovarian hyperstimulation, use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist trigger and avoiding exposure to human chorionic gonadotropin, frozen embryo transfer in a natural cycle, single embryo transfer, avoiding multiple pregnancy, and use of prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation are the various risk-reduction strategies that must be adopted during IVF treatment to reduce the risk of thrombosis to that of natural conception.

Thrombosis following ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

The aim of this review is to analyse the pathophysiology and complications of thrombosis in conjuction with ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) following ovulation induction and to suggest practical guidelines usefull for the prevention and treatment. Although the incidence of thrombosis varies from 0.2% among in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles and up to 10% for severe cases of the syndrome, it represents the most dangerous complication of OHSS. Different changes in haemostatic markers have been found to create a state of hypercoagulability, but no single standard test is available to estimate the state of thrombosis. The role of markers for thrombophilia is controversial. Thromboses are mostly venous (67-75%) involving upper limbs and neck, then arterial (25-33%) which are mainly intracerebral. The predominant sites of venous thromboembolism in the upper part of the body may be explained by higher concentrations of estrogens drained through lymphatic ducts from ascites and by compression of rudimentary branchyal cysts. Once early diagnosis is established, it is crucial to use an anticoagulant treatment with heparin proceeded with thromboprophylaxis. However, identification of patients at risk and preventive measures of OHSS are the best means in reducing the risk of thrombosis after ovarian stimulation.

Risk of thrombosis in women with malignancies undergoing ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation

BACKGROUND

Compared with the general population, cancer patients have a higher risk of venous thromboembolism as well as arterial thrombotic events such as stroke, myocardial infarction and peripheral arterial embolism. Therefore a possible concern for women with malignancies undergoing ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation is the increased risk of venous or arterial thrombosis.

METHODS

In this article, we revised current available literature on the risk of thrombosis in patients with cancer and in women undergoing ovarian stimulation, with the ultimate aim of drawing some indications for preventive measures.

RESULTS

Unfortunately, there are no specific data on the risk of thrombosis in women with cancer undergoing ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation. However, the literature suggests that the cancer type and stage, surgery, and chemotherapy all influence the risk of venous and, possibly, arterial thrombosis. Reports of cases of ovarian stimulation in women without malignancies have shown that venous thrombosis rarely occurs unless a pregnancy is achieved, while arterial thrombosis can occur in the absence of pregnancy but is usually only associated with ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). OHSS increases the risk of thrombotic events, but only the early form of the syndrome is relevant for women undergoing fertility preservation.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence on the risks of thrombosis for women undergoing ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation due to a malignancy is reassuring. However the avoidance of the early form of OHSS in women preserving oocytes/embryos due to malignancy is crucial. For these cycles, we advocate the use of a regimen of ovarian stimulation with gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists using GnRH agonists to trigger ovulation, an approach that has been shown to markedly reduce the risk of OHSS. Antithrombotic prophylaxis should be administered only to selected subgroups of women such as those with other risk factors or those who do develop early OHSS.