Investigation of the infertile couple: a one-stop ultrasound-based approach.

The appropriateness of many investigations for subfertility will continue to be of debate for some time yet. Of most benefit to the concerned couple would be a process that is diagnostically accurate, expeditious and reliable. It should be performed with a minimum of invasion and provide both patient and clinician with useful prognostic information regarding possible future treatment. This article is intended to illustrate the advantages of an ultrasound-based process of subfertility investigation. Discussed is the role of ultrasound compared with more invasive investigative methods such as laparoscopy and hysteroscopy. In addition, the potential capacity of newer advanced ultrasound technologies is reviewed.     

Investigation of the infertile couple: should diagnostic laparoscopy be performed after normal hysterosalpingography in treating infertility suspected to be of unknown origin?

Traditionally, a diagnosis of unexplained infertility is established only when all standard clinical investigations yield normal results. When tubal patency has been established by hysterosalpingography (HSG), laparoscopy has been suggested as a mandatory step to preclude the existence of peritubal adhesions and endometriosis as causes of infertility. In women without a previous history suggestive of tubal disease and who have a normal HSG, it was demonstrated that the probability of clinically relevant tubal disease or endometriosis is very low and that laparoscopy does not seem justified or cost effective. In the minority of these cases, laparoscopy might reveal minimal or mild endometriosis or peritubal adhesions. In these cases, either surgery or medical treatment has not been proven to improve fecundity. With the current success rates of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) and the relatively low contribution of diagnostic laparoscopy to the decision-making process of treating patients with a normal HSG, we suggest that laparoscopy should be omitted in couples suspected of having unexplained infertility. These patients should be treated by 3-6 cycles of combined gonadotrophins and intrauterine insemination, and if unsuccessful switched to ART.     

Investigation of the infertile couple: investigation of the infertile couple in the era of assisted reproductive technology: a time for reappraisal

At present, several of the elements in widespread use in basic infertility testing are in dispute, marked variability exists in the work-up among specialists, and practice patterns are influenced both by modern assisted reproductive technologies (ART) and the increasing age of couples seeking help for infertility. This article is intended to stimulate the debate on a possible (lack of) usefulness of conventional methods of infertility evaluation in relation to both the modern techniques of assisted reproduction and the woman's age.     

Fertility preservation of boys undergoing anti-cancer therapy: a review of the existing situation and prospects for the future

With the advancement of medical science, most cancers in children are now treatable, the cure rate being almost 85%. In boys, one side effect of treatment (chemotherapy and radiotherapy) is destruction of the sperm precursor cells in the testis, resulting in the failure of sperm formation after puberty, and consequent infertility. At the time of anti-cancer treatment, future fertility of the boy patient is at the very bottom of the relative quality of life (RQL) parameters list; however, in adults infertility is an important issue following cure from cancer. In this article we have first reviewed the existing situation with regard to the state of the art of fertility preservation in young boys with cancer, and have then raised clinical and ethical issues and suggested a way forward. The review concludes with the emphasis that certain important issues still need to be resolved and, until these are, then the different techniques available should be confined to approved, ethical clinical trials where efficacy and safety can be fully evaluated.     

Cancer survivors in the United States: a review of the literature and a call to action

Background: The number of cancer survivors in the U.S. has increased from 3 million in 1971, when the National Cancer Act was enacted, to over 12 million today. Over 70% of children affected by cancer survive more than 10 years, and most are cured. Most cancer survivors are adults, with two-thirds of them 65 years of age or older and two-thirds alive at five years. The most common cancer diagnoses among survivors include breast, prostate and colorectal cancers. This review was conducted to better appreciate the challenges associated with cancer survivors and the opportunities healthcare providers have in making a difference for these patients.Methods: Comprehensive review of literature based on PubMed searches on topics related to cancer survivorship, and associated physical, cognitive, socio-economic, sexual/behavioral and legal issues.Results: At least 50% of cancer survivors suffer from late treatment-related side effects, often including physical, psychosocial, cognitive and sexual abnormalities, as well as concerns regarding recurrence and/or the development of new malignancies. Many are chronic in nature and some are severe and even life-threatening. Survivors also face issues involving lack of appropriate health maintenance counseling, increased unemployment rate and workplace discrimination.Conclusions: Advances in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer will lead to more survivors and better quality of life. However, tools to recognize potentially serious long-lasting side effects of cancer therapy earlier in order to treat and/or prevent them must be developed. It is incumbent upon our health care delivery systems to make meeting these patients'' needs a priority.