对南非跨境卵母细胞捐赠的澳大利亚接受者的后果:双胚胎移植和捐赠者匿名。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Cal Volks, Karin Hammarberg, Andrea Whittaker
{"title":"对南非跨境卵母细胞捐赠的澳大利亚接受者的后果:双胚胎移植和捐赠者匿名。","authors":"Cal Volks, Karin Hammarberg, Andrea Whittaker","doi":"10.1111/ajo.70027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Due to the shortage of oocyte donors in Australia, Australian women increasingly travel overseas for oocyte donation. South Africa is a recognised 'repro-hub' due to the accessibility of relatively affordable, high-quality assisted reproductive technology services and the availability of donors. In contrast to Australia, where only known and identity release altruistic gamete donation is permitted, in South Africa, oocyte donors are anonymous and receive fixed compensation.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To explore the consequences for Australian recipients of cross-border oocyte donation (CBOD) in South Africa.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 Australian recipients who had at least one live birth after oocyte donation in South Africa between 2012 and 2020. Interviews were transcribed and transcripts analysed thematically.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most participants had failed assisted reproductive treatment in Australia before travelling to South Africa. Inability to secure an Australian donor led to CBOD. Ten recipients had at least one double embryo transfer (DET). Of the 15 pregnancies, participants reported one third were twin pregnancies. Some had more than one double embryo transfer cycle. Donors were anonymous, creating disparity around access to genetic information between children conceived with an Australian donor and those conceived with a South African donor. Some Australian recipients used sleuthing methods to locate donor siblings whose recipient parents had used the same donor.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Double embryo transfers increase the possibility of multiple pregnancy and its associated risks of poorer obstetric outcomes, and donor anonymity prevents donor conceived children's ability to officially access information about the donor through donor registers. Strategies to address the shortage of Australian oocyte donors could alleviate the need for CBOD. Education about the consequences of DET and donor anonymity is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":55429,"journal":{"name":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Consequences for Australian Recipients of Cross Border Oocyte Donation in South Africa: Double Embryo Transfer and Donor Anonymity.\",\"authors\":\"Cal Volks, Karin Hammarberg, Andrea Whittaker\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajo.70027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Due to the shortage of oocyte donors in Australia, Australian women increasingly travel overseas for oocyte donation. South Africa is a recognised 'repro-hub' due to the accessibility of relatively affordable, high-quality assisted reproductive technology services and the availability of donors. In contrast to Australia, where only known and identity release altruistic gamete donation is permitted, in South Africa, oocyte donors are anonymous and receive fixed compensation.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To explore the consequences for Australian recipients of cross-border oocyte donation (CBOD) in South Africa.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 Australian recipients who had at least one live birth after oocyte donation in South Africa between 2012 and 2020. Interviews were transcribed and transcripts analysed thematically.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most participants had failed assisted reproductive treatment in Australia before travelling to South Africa. Inability to secure an Australian donor led to CBOD. Ten recipients had at least one double embryo transfer (DET). Of the 15 pregnancies, participants reported one third were twin pregnancies. Some had more than one double embryo transfer cycle. Donors were anonymous, creating disparity around access to genetic information between children conceived with an Australian donor and those conceived with a South African donor. Some Australian recipients used sleuthing methods to locate donor siblings whose recipient parents had used the same donor.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Double embryo transfers increase the possibility of multiple pregnancy and its associated risks of poorer obstetric outcomes, and donor anonymity prevents donor conceived children's ability to officially access information about the donor through donor registers. Strategies to address the shortage of Australian oocyte donors could alleviate the need for CBOD. Education about the consequences of DET and donor anonymity is needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55429,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.70027\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.70027","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:由于澳大利亚的卵母细胞供体短缺,越来越多的澳大利亚妇女到海外捐献卵母细胞。南非是一个公认的“生殖中心”,因为可以获得相对负担得起的高质量辅助生殖技术服务,并且可以获得捐助者。在澳大利亚,只有已知和身份释放的利他配子捐赠才被允许,而在南非,卵母细胞捐赠者是匿名的,并接受固定的补偿。目的:探讨在南非接受跨境卵母细胞捐赠(CBOD)的澳大利亚人的后果。材料和方法:对2012年至2020年期间在南非捐赠卵母细胞后至少有一个活产的12名澳大利亚受赠人进行了半结构化访谈。采访记录下来,并按主题分析笔录。结果:大多数参与者在前往南非之前在澳大利亚接受辅助生殖治疗失败。由于无法找到澳大利亚捐赠者,导致了慢性阻塞性肺病。10例受者至少进行了一次双胚胎移植(DET)。在15次怀孕中,参与者报告三分之一是双胞胎怀孕。有些人有一个以上的双胚胎移植周期。捐赠者是匿名的,这就造成了澳大利亚捐赠者和南非捐赠者在获取基因信息方面的差异。一些澳大利亚的受赠者使用了侦查方法来寻找受赠者父母使用过同一供体的兄弟姐妹。结论:双胚胎移植增加了多胎妊娠的可能性及其相关的不良产科结局风险,并且捐赠者匿名阻止了捐赠者怀孕的孩子通过捐赠者登记正式获取捐赠者信息的能力。解决澳大利亚卵母细胞供体短缺的战略可以减轻对CBOD的需求。需要对DET和捐赠者匿名的后果进行教育。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Consequences for Australian Recipients of Cross Border Oocyte Donation in South Africa: Double Embryo Transfer and Donor Anonymity.

Background: Due to the shortage of oocyte donors in Australia, Australian women increasingly travel overseas for oocyte donation. South Africa is a recognised 'repro-hub' due to the accessibility of relatively affordable, high-quality assisted reproductive technology services and the availability of donors. In contrast to Australia, where only known and identity release altruistic gamete donation is permitted, in South Africa, oocyte donors are anonymous and receive fixed compensation.

Aims: To explore the consequences for Australian recipients of cross-border oocyte donation (CBOD) in South Africa.

Materials and methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 Australian recipients who had at least one live birth after oocyte donation in South Africa between 2012 and 2020. Interviews were transcribed and transcripts analysed thematically.

Results: Most participants had failed assisted reproductive treatment in Australia before travelling to South Africa. Inability to secure an Australian donor led to CBOD. Ten recipients had at least one double embryo transfer (DET). Of the 15 pregnancies, participants reported one third were twin pregnancies. Some had more than one double embryo transfer cycle. Donors were anonymous, creating disparity around access to genetic information between children conceived with an Australian donor and those conceived with a South African donor. Some Australian recipients used sleuthing methods to locate donor siblings whose recipient parents had used the same donor.

Conclusions: Double embryo transfers increase the possibility of multiple pregnancy and its associated risks of poorer obstetric outcomes, and donor anonymity prevents donor conceived children's ability to officially access information about the donor through donor registers. Strategies to address the shortage of Australian oocyte donors could alleviate the need for CBOD. Education about the consequences of DET and donor anonymity is needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
11.80%
发文量
165
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (ANZJOG) is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG) and the RANZCOG Research foundation. ANZJOG aims to provide a medium for the publication of original contributions to clinical practice and/or research in all fields of obstetrics and gynaecology and related disciplines. Articles are peer reviewed by clinicians or researchers expert in the field of the submitted work. From time to time the journal will also publish printed abstracts from the RANZCOG Annual Scientific Meeting and meetings of relevant special interest groups, where the accepted abstracts have undergone the journals peer review acceptance process.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信