Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-223323

ABSTRACT

Essure (Bayer) received approval from the U.S. Food and Drugs Administration as a permanent non-hormonal contraceptive implant in November 2002. While the use of Essure in the management of hydrosalpinx prior to in vitro fertilization (IVF) remains off-label, it has been used specifically for this purpose since at least 2007. Although most published reports on Essure placement before IVF have been reassuring, clinical experience remains limited, and no randomized studies have demonstrated the safety or efficacy of Essure in this context. In fact, no published guidelines deal with patient selection or counseling regarding the Essure procedure specifically in the context of IVF. Although Essure is an irreversible birth control option, some patients request the surgical removal of the implants for various reasons. While these patients could eventually undergo hysterectomy, at present no standardized technique exists for simple Essure removal with conservation of the uterus. This article emphasizes new aspects of the Essure procedure, as we describe the first known association between the placement of Essure implants and the subsequent development of fluid within the uterine cavity, which resolved after the surgical removal of both devices.


Subject(s)
Humans , Contraception , Counseling , Fertilization in Vitro , Hysterectomy , Laparoscopy , Patient Selection , Uterus
2.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-147754

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To measure Irish opinion on a range of assisted human reproduction (AHR) treatments. METHODS: A nationally representative sample of Irish adults (n=1,003) were anonymously sampled by telephone survey. RESULTS: Most participants (77%) agreed that any fertility services offered internationally should also be available in Ireland, although only a small minority of the general Irish population had personal familiarity with AHR or infertility. This sample finds substantial agreement (63%) that the Government of Ireland should introduce legislation covering AHR. The range of support for gamete donation in Ireland ranged from 53% to 83%, depending on how donor privacy and disclosure policies are presented. For example, donation where the donor agrees to be contacted by the child born following donation, and anonymous donation where donor privacy is completely protected by law were supported by 68% and 66%, respectively. The least popular (53%) donor gamete treatment type appeared to be donation where the donor consents to be involved in the future life of any child born as a result of donor fertility treatment. Respondents in social class ABC1 (58%), age 18 to 24 (62%), age 25 to 34 (60%), or without children (61%) were more likely to favour this donor treatment policy in our sample. CONCLUSION: This is the first nationwide assessment of Irish public opinion on the advanced reproductive technologies since 2005. Access to a wide range of AHR treatment was supported by all subgroups studied. Public opinion concerning specific types of AHR treatment varied, yet general support for the need for national AHR legislation was reported by 63% of this national sample. Contemporary views on AHR remain largely consistent with the Commission for Assisted Human Reproduction recommendations from 2005, although further research is needed to clarify exactly how popular opinion on these issues has changed. It appears that legislation allowing for the full range of donation options (and not mandating disclosure of donor identity at a stipulated age) would better align with current Irish public opinion.


Subject(s)
Adult , Child , Humans , Anonyms and Pseudonyms , Surveys and Questionnaires , Disclosure , Fertility , Fertilization in Vitro , Infertility , Ireland , Jurisprudence , Privacy , Public Opinion , Public Policy , Recognition, Psychology , Reproduction , Reproductive Techniques , Social Class , Telephone , Tissue Donors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL