Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Sperm Donors' Identity Disclosure: Is It REALLY Crucial? For Whom?
Ronen, Maya; Kaufman, Sarita; Kedem, Alon; Avraham, Sarit; Youngster, Michal; Yerushalmi, Gil; Hourvitz, Ariel; Gat, Itai.
Afiliación
  • Ronen M; Sperm Bank & Andrology Unit, Shamir Medical Center, Zrifin, Israel. Electronic address: mayaronenmd@gmail.com.
  • Kaufman S; Sperm Bank & Andrology Unit, Shamir Medical Center, Zrifin, Israel.
  • Kedem A; IVF Department, Shamir Medical Center, Zrifin, Israel; Faculty of Medicinel, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
  • Avraham S; IVF Department, Shamir Medical Center, Zrifin, Israel.
  • Youngster M; IVF Department, Shamir Medical Center, Zrifin, Israel.
  • Yerushalmi G; IVF Department, Shamir Medical Center, Zrifin, Israel.
  • Hourvitz A; IVF Department, Shamir Medical Center, Zrifin, Israel; Faculty of Medicinel, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
  • Gat I; Sperm Bank & Andrology Unit, Shamir Medical Center, Zrifin, Israel; IVF Department, Shamir Medical Center, Zrifin, Israel; Faculty of Medicinel, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
J Obstet Gynaecol Can ; 46(4): 102337, 2024 Apr.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38160797
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To study the preference of sperm donors with identity disclosure (ID) versus anonymous donors (AD) and to understand if this selection affects clinical outcomes in an Israeli population.

METHODS:

This retrospective study included patients who chose imported sperm donation during 2017-2021. Of these, 526 used their own (autologous) oocytes and 43 patients used donated oocytes (DO). The primary endpoint was the type of chosen donor with ID versus AD. We examined the tendency toward ID according to demographic parameters and the theoretical impact of donor-type selection on reproductive outcome and compared patients who performed cycles with autologous oocytes with those using DO.

RESULTS:

Single women had a significantly higher probability of choosing sperm donors with ID than heterosexual couples (55.6% vs. 33.3%, OR 2.5, CI 95% 1.52-4.11, P < 0.001). Although not significant, same-sex couples were more likely to choose sperm donors with ID than heterosexual couples (49.1% vs. 33.3%, OR 1.93, CI 95% 0.97-3.85, P = 0.06). Sperm donor samples, 2501 vials, were imported. It was performed 698 intra-uterine insemination and 812 in vitro fertilization cycles were performed, respectively, resulting in 283 pregnancies without differences between patients who chose sperm donors with ID versus AD sperm. No significant differences were observed regarding the option for sperm donors with ID between patients using DO (44.2%) and those using autologous oocytes (51.3%).

CONCLUSION:

While ID is important for a certain section (mainly single) of recipients, it is far from the only dominant factor during donor selection. Sperm donation type does not impact clinical outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Donantes de Tejidos Límite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Pregnancy País/Región como asunto: Asia Idioma: En Revista: J Obstet Gynaecol Can Asunto de la revista: GINECOLOGIA / OBSTETRICIA Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: Países Bajos
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Donantes de Tejidos Límite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Pregnancy País/Región como asunto: Asia Idioma: En Revista: J Obstet Gynaecol Can Asunto de la revista: GINECOLOGIA / OBSTETRICIA Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: Países Bajos