Influence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon exposure on IVF: now is the time to focus on women.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Is polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) exposure associated with the reproductive outcomes of IVF treatment? DESIGN: A prospective, small-scale monocentric cohort study of couples who underwent IVF treatment between January 2018 and June 2019. Both members of each couple answered a questionnaire on PAH exposure and provided urine samples to measure urinary 1-hydroxypyrene (1-OHP) the day before oocyte retrieval and semen collection for fertilization. To assess the specific PAH exposure of gamete cells, immunostaining was conducted on both spermatozoa and granulosa cells obtained during IVF with an anti-benzo(a)pyrene diol epoxide (BPDE) monoclonal antibody that recognizes BDPE-DNA adducts. To assess DNA damage, a comet assay on spermatozoa was conducted. The PAH exposure was compared between couples who had positive HCG and couples who had negative HCG on day 14 after embryo transfer. RESULTS: Eighteen couples were included. The mean 1-OHP level in women whose HCG tests were positive (n = 6) was significantly lower than that in women with negative HCG tests (0.098 [0.042-0.170] versus 0.177 [0.067-0.812] µg/g creatinine; P = 0.048). The presence of BPDE-DNA adducts in granulosa cells of women with a negative (29.7 [16.2-57.5] arbitrary units) or positive HCG test (20.3 [9.3-23.3] arbitrary units) were not significantly different (P = 0.092). The urinary 1-OHP levels of men and BPDE-DNA adducts in spermatozoa showed no differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory research should encourage further studies to determine the effect of women's exposure to PAHs on reproductive outcomes of IVF treatment.

Learning Intracorporeal Suture on Pelvitrainer Using a Robotized Versus Conventional Needle Holder.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopy is the gold standard approach in numerous surgical procedures. A new generation of robotized instruments has been developed to compensate for the ergonomic constraints of conventional instruments. The main objective was to compare the learning curves of novices for intracorporeal suturing on a laparoscopy pelvitrainer, using either a robotized needle holder or conventional needle holders. The post-training performances under ergonomically difficult conditions were also analyzed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifth-year medical students were randomized in group A using a robotized needle holder (JAIMY; Endocontrol, Grenoble, France) and group B using straight conventional needle holders. They undertook four training sessions (intracorporeal knot-tying task) followed by an evaluation session (intracorporeal knots-tying task, frontal suture, and hexagonal suture). RESULTS: Twenty participants were included. The performances of the two groups (n = 10) were not significantly different at baseline. During the training sessions, there was a learning curve with a plateau at the third session for both the groups. At the final evaluation session, there was no significant difference between group A and group B for the intracorporeal knot-tying task (median fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery score: 468 versus 474.5 respectively; P = 0.762). There was a significant difference between group A and group B for the frontal suture (median global score: 15.75 versus 3.75 respectively; P = 0.005) but not for the hexagonal suture (median global score: 18 versus 15 respectively; P = 0.284). CONCLUSIONS: Learning curves were equally fast using the robotized needle holder versus conventional instruments and led to equivalent performances. Under ergonomically difficult conditions, the robotized needle holder provided an advantage relative to conventional instruments.