G Bahadur1, K L E Ling, R Hart, D Ralph, V Riley, R Wafa, A Ashraf, N Jaman, A W Oyede. 1. Royal Free and University College Medical School, Department of Obstetrics Gynaecology, Fertility and Reproductive Medicine Laboratories, University College Hospitals Trust, 88-96 Chenies Mews, London WC1E 6HX, UK. g.bahadur@ucl.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The influence of an accompanying person (parent, guardian or nurse) on the ability of an adolescent (post-pubescent, <20 years of age) to produce a semen sample for cryopreservation, is undetermined, as is the potential for use of urine samples to retrieve sperm in those adolescents that are unable to produce a semen sample. METHODS: The records from 1991-2000 inclusive were reviewed to derive those adolescent patients who were unable to produce semen for cryopreservation prior to undergoing treatment for a malignant condition. RESULTS: During the study period 238 adolescents attended our unit of whom 205 (86.1%) banked semen ('producers'). The remaining 33 adolescents (13.9%) were initially unable to produce a sample ('non-producers'), four of these provided a urine specimen for analysis (12.1%) and of these one had sufficient sperm for cryopreservation. Of the 'accompanied' patients 29.7% (19/64) were non-producers while in the 'unaccompanied' patients only 8.0% (14/174) were non-producers (chi(2) = 16.58, P < 0.001). The relative risk (RR) of not producing a semen sample for the accompanied group of patients was greater than that for the unaccompanied group (RR = 3.689, 95% confidence interval: 2.0-6.9). One patient returning alone successfully provided a semen sample for storage. CONCLUSION: Units should consider the effect of the presence of an accompanying person when an adolescent is unable to produce a semen sample and should consider requesting urine to retrieve sperm.
BACKGROUND: The influence of an accompanying person (parent, guardian or nurse) on the ability of an adolescent (post-pubescent, <20 years of age) to produce a semen sample for cryopreservation, is undetermined, as is the potential for use of urine samples to retrieve sperm in those adolescents that are unable to produce a semen sample. METHODS: The records from 1991-2000 inclusive were reviewed to derive those adolescent patients who were unable to produce semen for cryopreservation prior to undergoing treatment for a malignant condition. RESULTS: During the study period 238 adolescents attended our unit of whom 205 (86.1%) banked semen ('producers'). The remaining 33 adolescents (13.9%) were initially unable to produce a sample ('non-producers'), four of these provided a urine specimen for analysis (12.1%) and of these one had sufficient sperm for cryopreservation. Of the 'accompanied' patients 29.7% (19/64) were non-producers while in the 'unaccompanied' patients only 8.0% (14/174) were non-producers (chi(2) = 16.58, P < 0.001). The relative risk (RR) of not producing a semen sample for the accompanied group of patients was greater than that for the unaccompanied group (RR = 3.689, 95% confidence interval: 2.0-6.9). One patient returning alone successfully provided a semen sample for storage. CONCLUSION: Units should consider the effect of the presence of an accompanying person when an adolescent is unable to produce a semen sample and should consider requesting urine to retrieve sperm.
Authors: Lydia H Pecker; Deva Sharma; Alecia Nero; Michael J Paidas; Russell E Ware; Andra H James; Kim Smith-Whitley Journal: Br J Haematol Date: 2021-07-07 Impact factor: 8.615