Fertility Preservation Counselling for Women With Endometriosis: A European Online Survey

Fertility Preservation Counselling for Women With Endometriosis: A European Online Survey | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Fertility Preservation Counselling for Women With Endometriosis: A European Online Survey Nicole Sänger, Marco Menabrito, Atillio Di Spiezo Di Spiezo Sardo, and 2 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-966804/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background : Endometriosis is a common cause for infertility. Decreased ovarian reserve due to pathology or surgical management can reduce the chances of natural pregnancy and limit the effectiveness of controlled ovarian stimulation during fertility treatment. Cryopreservation of oocytes or ovarian cortex prior to surgery or before loss of follicular capital are strategies to preserve fecundity. Methods : An online survey was sent to reproductive specialists and gynaecological surgeons representing major centers of reproductive medicine in Europe to investigate current fertility preservation practices for endometriosis patients. Results : Of 58 responses, 45 (77.6%) in 11/13 countries reported the existence of endometriosis management guidelines, of which 37/45 (82.2%) included treatment recommendations for infertile patients. Most centers (51.7%) reserved fertility counselling for severe endometriosis (large endometriomas with or without deep endometriosis) while 15.5% of centers did not offer fertility preservation for endometriosis. Conclusions : To address non-uniformity in available guidelines and the diversity in fertility preservation practices, we propose an algorithm for managing patients with severe endometriosis most likely to be impacted by reduced ovarian reserve. Improved awareness about the possibilities of fertility preservation and clear communication between gynaecological surgeons and reproductive medicine specialists is mandatory to address the unmet clinical need of preventing infertility in women with endometriosis. Sexual & Reproductive Medicine endometriosis endometrioma surgery assisted reproductive technology (ART) ovarian reserve female infertility fertility preservation cryopreservation oocyte ovarian tissue Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Plain English Summary Women with endometriosis may have a decreased chance of pregnancy where cryopreservation could be beneficial to maintain fecundity. An online survey involving reproductive specialists and gynaecological surgeons was carried out to assess the current situation in Europe regarding the management of women with endometriosis seeking fertility. Within the 58 respondents there was a diversity of treatment options. Although some guidelines exist, there is clearly a lack of uniformity. One in six centers did not offer any fertility preservation in women with endometriosis. We propose an algorithm that could help women with severe endometriosis to maintain fertility. As awareness on this topic would increase, more women could benefit from an improved cooperation between gynaecological surgeons and fertility specialists. 1. Background Fertility preservation of oocytes and embryos has been used for several years. Its efficacy and safety have been demonstrated not only in women requiring gonadotoxic therapies due to malignant diseases, but also in other circumstances that threaten the ovarian reserve, such as endometriosis [ 1 – 4 ]. Endometriosis is a common chronic inflammatory condition of the pelvis, which can lead to dysmenorrhoea, chronic pelvic pain and infertility. It is an oestrogen-dependent disease that affects up to 10% of women during their reproductive life. Fertility issues are present in approximately 30–50% of endometriosis patients, with both pathologic and iatrogenic causes [ 5 , 6 ]. Pathologic causes of infertility associated with endometriosis include dysfunctional uterine and tubular peristaltic motility, chronic intraperitoneal inflammation, disturbed folliculogenesis, luteinized unruptured follicles, luteal phase defects, progesterone resistance and anti-endometrial antibodies [ 7 ]. With large endometriomas, loss of follicular density can occur secondary to stretching of the ovarian cortex and additional gonadotoxic insult can result from iron uptake from cells near the endometrioma. Local inflammation leads to fibrosis and loss of cortex-specific stroma and might be associated with reduced vascularisation and increased oxidative stress, resulting in atresia, “burn-out” of the ovary and a reduced follicular count [ 8 – 11 ]. Surgical management of endometriosis can also have a detrimental effect on ovarian reserve [ 12 , 13 ]. The surgical removal of endometriotic lesions may cause iatrogenic adnexal or follicular damage when removing ovarian endometriomas and pelvic adhesions, even in the hands of highly skilled surgeons [ 14 ]. Thus, while fertility treatment is frequently sought among women with endometriosis, the outcomes of assisted reproductive techniques (ART) may be impaired due to fewer oocytes and poor oocyte quality. Indeed, there is a negative correlation between the size of the endometriomas and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels, and patients with bilateral endometriomas have a lower AMH than those with unilateral endometriomas [ 15 ]. These factors can affect the ovarian response to stimulation in ART, leading to use of increased follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) doses [ 16 – 18 ]. These issues highlight a need for fertility preservation strategies to protect follicular capital in women with endometriosis before the condition advances or surgical treatment compromises ovarian function. Cryopreservation of fertilized oocytes for use in later embryo transfer cycles shows comparable rates of fertilization, embryo development and pregnancy rates to freshly transferred embryos in patients with endometriosis [ 4 , 19 , 20 ]. Cryopreservation of ovarian cortex, first described by Donnez et al (2004) [ 21 ] is another technique that has become increasingly accepted for fertility preservation and endorsed by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) [ 22 ]. In women with ovarian endometriomas, pre-operative assessment of AMH and antral follicular count (AFC) are relevant before a planned surgical treatment, as women with advanced stage endometriosis tend to have a lower serum AMH levels and because postoperative infertility is more likely to occur in older patients with a lower level of serum AMH per se [ 23 ]. A negative effect of age, number of vitrified oocytes and oocyte survival on the cumulative life-birth-rate was recently confirmed in a large series of endometriosis patients that underwent fertility preservation [ 24 , 25 ]. Results from this group indicate that 20 or more vitrified oocytes would be needed to achieve at least one life birth after fertility preservation in an endometriosis patient [ 20 ], a goal that might be reachable in younger patients within one or two controlled ovarian stimulations. In women older than 35 years and perhaps for surgeries that have already taken place due to endometriosis cysts or implants, this number would be impossible to attain [ 24 ]. Therefore, fertility preservation counselling should be offered before endometriosis surgery in some conditions, when the risks of deleterious effect on the ovarian reserve are obvious. Depending on the disease stage, it could also be advisable to perform surgical excision of endometriomas before ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation [ 26 ]. Despite the known potential risks of impaired fertility with endometriosis, not all physicians take fertility preservation into account when planning therapeutic options as no clear clinical guidelines for endometriosis and fertility preservation exist in most countries. A review of national and international guidelines on diagnosis and therapy of endometriosis shows contradicting recommendations on whether IVF or surgery should be performed as the first approach in endometriosis patients, and fertility preservation does not have a significant place in the guidelines, even in patients with severe endometriosis [ 27 ]. Whether a patient receives fertility counselling may depend on the type (surgeon or a fertility specialist) and expertise of the physician to whom she is first referred. A published debate among surgical gynaecologists and reproductive medicine specialists illustrates that the approach to managing endometriosis patients varies enormously [ 26 ]. The surgeons’ viewpoint is that diagnostic laparoscopy will confirm an early diagnosis, reduce pain and improves the natural conception rate, enabling the patient to receive optimal further treatment after a pregnancy. Reproductive medicine specialists advocate IVF as the initial strategy because it will shorten the time to pregnancy and avoid any adverse influence of surgery on the ovarian reserve. Alongside these opposing approaches, the possibility of maintaining fertility by cryopreservation of fertilized or unfertilized oocytes was mentioned by only one of the panellists in this debate [ 26 ]. Likewise, communications between treatment centres and patients about options for fertility preservation are lacking, since not all institutions offer elective fertility preservation or have protocols to guide patients for fertility counselling [ 28 ]. For young patients however the feasibility of a systematic proposal of fertility preservation by oocyte cryopreservation has already been demonstrated and an oocyte accumulation strategy was proposed to enhance further pregnancy chances [ 29 – 31 ]. We therefore conducted a European survey to investigate the existence of local guidelines regarding endometriosis surgery and fertility preservation, to evaluate if centres/hospitals are offering this possibility, and if so, which techniques are used, and how these are performed. 2. Materials And Methods A 19-item questionnaire (see Appendix A) was developed, agreed, and tested among all the authors. It was hosted on an online survey platform (SurveyMonkey). The questions included either multiple-choice or single-response answers. The questionnaire was sent to gynaecological surgeons and fertility specialists through the ORBIS network, an international collaborative group of gynaecologists specialized in diseases such as fibroids and endometriosis that can impair infertility. The questionnaire was distributed between December 2019 and March 2020 and again between January 2021 until March 2021 to increase the response-rate. It was distributed by email to major centres of reproductive medicine across Europe and directly to medical colleagues. It was also advertised on social media including Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, and included in newsletters of gynaecological and fertility centres/ hospitals. We planned to have at least one response from every country to provide a European overview on the current situation. 3. Results A total of 61 responses were collected from 13 European countries. Three were excluded due to double entries from the same institution. Thus, responses from a total of 58 European fertility centres/hospitals (30 public, 22 private and 6 are not available) were evaluated, of which 18 were university hospitals and/or fertility centres with a high number of IVF cycles (>500 cycles, n=17; >1000 cycles: n=14; Figure 1 ). Seven centres do not perform any ART but offer endometriosis treatments and surgery. 3.1. Endometriosis guidelines Of particular interest was whether a national endometriosis guideline existed in the countries that responded, and whether such guidelines included treatment options both for infertile patients and for fertility preservation. The majority of respondents (n=45, 77.6%) affirmed an existing guideline for endometriosis, including centres in Germany, Spain, Italy, Denmark, the Netherlands and the UK. Thirteen (22.4%) respondents stated there were no national guidelines at all on endometriosis; these included centres in Belgium, France, Portugal, Austria, Switzerland, Finland and Sweden, though Swedish national guidelines were published in June 2020 [ 32 ], which was after our first survey period. Several of these countries, however, reported contradictory answers towards the availability of an endometriosis guideline (Figure 2 ), suggesting that even where guidelines are available, they are not followed universally. Of respondents who were aware of a national guideline for endometriosis, 37/45 (82.2%) reported that treatment recommendations for infertile patients were included. 3.2. Fertility preservation in endometriosis patients Since treatment using ART is common in infertile patients, we focused our questions in this study on fertility preservation, especially in patients with severe stage III and IV endometriosis and the desire to have children. Overall, 84.5% of centres offered elective fertility preservation to some or all women with endometriosis; this was to all patients with endometriosis (32.8%), only patients with large endometriomas (29.3%), or in some centres, only where large endometrioma was combined with deep infiltrating endometriosis (22.4%). Only 15.5% of centres did not offer any treatment for fertility preservation. Among centres that offered fertility preservation for endometriosis patients, multiple criteria were used to support this decision, the most common being age of the patient (81.0%) and a reduced ovarian reserve (75.9%). "Previous uni- or bilateral endometriomas with or without surgery” (55.2%), “delayed fertility wish” (55.2%) and "risk of losing time by surgery and recovery" (46.6%) were also important factors. Six centres did not offer fertility preservation in case of low ovarian reserve parameters or due to the absence of standard operation procedures for fertility preservation. In the case of large endometriomas (≥4 cm), 50.0% of centres reported that they would perform medical or surgical interventions before ovarian stimulation to facilitate oocyte pick-up, usually laparoscopic cystectomy or ablation (depending on size and thickness of the cystic wall). One centre uses progestin only ahead of controlled ovarian stimulation; two centres use gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists only; and two centres offer first-line GnRH agonists followed by laparoscopic surgery. In respondent centres in France, an intraoperative treatment with ethanol is used in cases of large endometrioma, and hormonal treatment combined with antibiotics is used in centres from Austria and the United Kingdom. In France, an intraoperative treatment with ethanol is used in cases of large endometrioma, and hormonal treatment combined with antibiotics is used in Austria and the United Kingdom. Nearly all respondents (89.3%) confirmed that they measured ovarian reserve with AMH, AFC and/or FSH before planning an individual treatment. 3.3. Therapeutic options in fertility preservation The preferred protocol for fertility preservation in endometriosis among responding centres is cryopreservation of unfertilized oocytes (31 centres, 53.4%) (Figure 3 ). For cryopreservation, most centres routinely perform vitrification (84.5%), while the others use the slow freezing method. The difference among countries in the permitted storage period for cryopreserved embryos or unfertilized egg cells is remarkable. While there is reportedly no time limit in most respondent centres (e.g., Austria, Germany, and Italy), storage time is limited in centres in Portugal (10 years), Belgium (until maternal age 43 years), Sweden (10 years), France and the United Kingdom. As for responses to other questions, there were some discrepancies from different centres in the same country. In Belgium, a storage period of 5 years was indicated by one centre, and a storage time to age 43 years by another, where the two answers may not be mutually exclusive. Similarly, in the United Kingdom, responses suggested there is a maximum storage period of 10 years up to a maximum age of 55. In France, the centres provided contradicting information regarding restrictions. Centres from Belgium, Finland, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain all reported an age limit for performing embryo transfer, which varies between 43 and 55 years. There was no reported age restriction for embryo transfer in centres from Austria, France, Germany and Italy. The most frequently used protocol for controlled ovarian stimulation before oocyte pick-up and storage was the antagonist protocol, used in 44.8% of the fertility centres. Interestingly, only 5 centres (8.6%) worked with the ultra-long protocol using GnRH agonists, 6 centres (10.3%) performed the classic long protocol and only one centre specified a natural cycle as their preferred approach. However, 34.5% of all fertility centres indicated individual therapy planning, so that the use of GnRH agonists might be part of the protocol, if required. 3.4. Post-surgery waiting time Since evidence is lacking about the optimal waiting time between endometriosis surgery and fertility treatment or pregnancy, we were also interested in the opinion of the respondents about this topic. Half of the respondents (28 centres, 48.3%) allowed pregnancy immediately after surgery, 24 centres (41.4%) would recommend waiting for at least three months and 6 centres would recommend waiting up to 6 months before allowing pregnancy. 3.5. Medical treatment between surgery and pregnancy Nearly eighty-three percent of respondents would consider offering drug therapy after surgery for endometriosis, usually oral contraceptives (62.7%) or GnRH-agonists (20.1%). The remaining 17.2% of respondents answered there is no need or indication for adjuvant therapy after surgery. Where oral contraceptives were advised, the most-preferred were progestin-only-pills (41.4% of all respondents) or combined oral contraceptives with a long cycle regime (44.8%). 3.6. Economic costs The last question looked at cost coverage of fertility preservation as part of the national system or by health insurance companies. Thirty-nine respondents (67.2%) reported that no coverage for fertility preservation is available. Countries where some form of reimbursement exist are Italy, France, Finland and Sweden. In Germany, public funding was approved in May 2019, to cover fertility preservation by cryopreservation of fertilized or unfertilized oocytes, but not for ovarian cortex storage; however, the guidelines that determine the amount of funding that will be covered and for which type of patient is still to be agreed. Once more, we obtained conflicting information from different centres within Belgium, Spain and the United Kingdom. 4. Discussion To the best of our knowledge, this is the first European survey on the availability and practice of fertility preservation in women with endometriosis. Many studies have addressed the issue of decreased fertility associated with endometriosis, but no uniform guidelines are in place for the implementation of fertility preservation in clinical practice. Moreover, where guidelines do exist, they are not consistently recognised. While some centres adhere to local or national guidelines, it was evident from discrepant responses to some questions among centres from the same countries that there is inconsistency in practices relating to management of infertility associated with endometriosis and provision of fertility preservation, and in limitations placed on them. A more uniform guideline is needed that is based on the available clinical evidence and is relevant for women across Europe. Every experienced gynaecologist is aware that both the condition of endometriosis and surgical treatments to manage it can significantly impair ovarian reserve. Although thousands of women across Europe are treated for endometriosis every day, the option of maintaining fertility plays a subordinate role. In addition to the organic changes in the ovary that occur especially in stage III and IV endometriosis, the advancing age at which many women now choose to try for a first pregnancy further increases the difficulty of achieving a successful reproductive outcome. Collectively, therefore it is surprizing that there are few clear and uniform guidelines that anticipate the risk of declining fertility and provide timely treatment recommendations for preserving fertility. This survey shows there is a need for guidelines to encourage fertility preservation in women with endometriosis before loss of ovarian reserve, with a focus on management of patients with bilateral endometriomas or those requiring multiple surgical interventions, in whom ovarian impact is greatest. Factors such as age, AMH and AFC, are of paramount importance to determine the most appropriate procedure and timing for the best chances of success. Undoubtedly, when considering the possibility of fertility preservation before planning endometriosis surgery, the younger the patient the better the results will be in terms of, for example, oocyte survival and cumulative live-birth-rate [ 20 , 24 ]. The cost-effectiveness of treatment and the calculation of costs by the health insurance company must not be disregarded. Two-thirds of respondents in the survey reported that there was no financial coverage for the provision of fertility preservation services in their country, although there were some conflicting responses on this point. With around 180 million women affected with endometriosis worldwide [ 33 ], a substantial effort would need to be made to implement a new guideline effectively, including changes in routine patient counselling pathways. A clear communication between gynaecologists performing surgery and reproductive medicine specialists is mandatory to increase the patient's likelihood of accessing services and having a baby. It is also important to remember that reproductive medicine has its limits, and can only help efficiently against the disruption of folliculogenesis caused by endometriosis, reduced sperm transport, chronic inflammation or even implantation defects due to decreased embryo receptivity [ 34 – 36 ]. The present survey was intended to provide an insight into the extent to which fertility preservation plays a role in the management of endometriosis patients in clinical practice and whether there are significant differences across Europe. However, the study is limited in the relatively small number of respondents and the lack of representation of some countries and it has no claim to provide a complete picture of endometriosis therapy in individual countries. Two rounds of the survey were necessary to attain a valid response-rate (28 responses the first round and 33 on the second. The fact that some centres disregarded the survey might suggest a general disinterest in this issue, which for women with endometriosis who struggle with infertility may seem discouraging. As indeed few centers in our survey follow guidelines regarding endometriosis and fertility preservation, many other centers will also have no interest and no guidelines and thus no respond to this survey. This is yet another reason why this survey is important for women with endometriosis. However, there are many factors that could influence the response rate to a survey of this type, other than actual interest in the topic. In view of the responses in the first and second round however, we found little or no differences, indicating that the responses obtained provided good representation of the fertility preservation practices in endometriosis across Europe. The high representation of Germany in the study — one-third of all responses — is striking, although it was not considered to be a confounding factor as the survey was designed mostly to evaluate local practices rather than to provide country-level responses. The results of the survey revealed a heterogeneity across centres in Europe in counselling on fertility preservation and treating patients of reproductive age suffering from endometriosis. This may be due to differing or absent national guidelines, as well as a lack of standardized procedures and cooperation between surgical centres and fertility centres. It was notable that in some cases, specialists were unaware of the existence of guidelines available in their country. In fact, over the past 10 years, guidelines for fertility preservation or diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis have been published in almost all European societies for gynaecology and obstetrics, and include recommendations from ESHRE, NICE, DGGG/ AWMF, SEF, CNGOF and SIGO, alongside globally recognised guidelines from ACOG, FIGO and WES (Table 1 ). In the guidelines for fertility preservation, no information is given explicitly for endometriosis patients and, conversely, the endometriosis recommendations rarely contain a clear statement regarding counselling and/or implementation of fertility maintenance. Seven out of 15 societies recommend the regular determination of the fertility parameters AMH and AFC and provide medical and surgical therapeutic options for those wishing to conceive (9/15). More than half of the published statements also consider that advice should be given on the potential impairment of the ovarian reserve (8/15), but without providing precise information about scenarios where fertility-preserving options such as freezing of oocytes or ovarian tissue is indicated. Indeed, the topic was intensively discussed for the first time in a plenary session at the 6th Biennial World Congress of the International Society for Fertility Preservation (ISFP) in New York, 2019, confirming the importance and increasing recognition of the place of fertility preservation in women with benign diseases such as endometriosis [ 37 ]. Table 1 Available international guidelines and recommendations on endometriosis, infertility and fertility preservation. Country/regional guideline [reference] Year Institute/ Group/ Society Measurement of fertility parameters prior to surgery? Recommenda-tions for infertile patients? Recommenda-tions on fertility preservation? Surgery prior to IVF? USA: Endometriosis [ 38 ] 2010 ACOG No No No IVF not listed Canada : Endometriosis [ 39 ] 2010 SOGC No Yes No In case of pain and endometriomas >3cm Europe: Endometriosis [ 40 ] 2014 ESHRE No Yes No In case of pain and endometriomas >3cm Europe: Female fertility preservation [41] 2020 ESHRE Yes No Yes No, as diseases are not listed individually International: Endometriosis pain and infertility [42] 2016 FIGO No Yes No In case of pain and endometriomas >3-4cm International: Endometriosis [ 43 ] 2017 WES No No No No France: Endometriosis [ 44 ] 2018 CNGOF Yes Yes Yes No Germany: Endometriosis [ 45 ] 2020 DGGG/ AWMF No No No No Germany: Fertility preservation [ 46 ] 2017 DGGG/ AWMF No No No Endometriosis not listed in this guideline Germany, Switzerland, Austria: Fertility preservation [ 47 ] 2020 Ferti-PROTEKT Yes Yes Yes No Italy: Endometriosis [ 48 ] 2018 SIGO No Yes Yes Yes in case of pain but not obligatory Spain: Endometriosis, women of childbearing age [49] 2018 SEF Yes Yes Yes Only in case of rapid growth or pain UK: Endometriosis [ 50 ] 2017 NICE Yes Yes No No Lessey 2018: Ovarian endometriosis & infertility [26] 2018 Publication/ debate yes Yes Yes Only 1/5 discussants recommended FP Cosma 2020: Classification of endometriosis [51] 2020 Review Yes Yes Yes Only in symptomatic patients and abnormal fertility tests Miller 2020: Endometrioma and fertility [ 8 ] 2020 Systematic review Yes No Yes Yes ACOG, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; AWMF, Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften (Association of the Scientific Medical Societies); CNGOF, Collège National des Gynécologues et Obstétricien Français; DGGG, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics ); ESHRE, European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology; FertiPROTEKT, Network of fertility preservation centres in German-speaking countries; FIGO, International Federation Of Gynecology And Obstetrics; FP, fertility preservation; NICE, (United Kingdom) National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; IVF, in vitro fertilization; SEF, Sociedad Española de Fertilidad (Spanish Fertility Society); SIGO, Italian Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics; SOGC, Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada; WES, World Endometriosis Society. During the survey, we also decided to review the literature for potential algorithms on fertility preservation and endometriosis. Five proposed algorithms for fertility preservation and endometriosis were identified in the recent literature (Table 2 ) [ 8 , 47 , 51 – 53 ]. While the publication of such recommendations is to be welcomed, their approach is heterogeneous, with selection criteria focussing variously on age, low AMH and the presence of endometriomas. Cosma et al. (2020) do not implement cryopreservation as a routine strategy in their algorithm, but state that it can be an option in selected cases with previous ovarian surgery or low AMH (near 1 ng/ml) [ 51 ]. The algorithm of Kho et al. (2018) looks at AMH and AFC when endometriosis is associated with concomitant fertility problems [ 52 ]; when poor ovarian reserve is encountered in women >30 years of age, gamete preservation is offered before surgical treatment. von Wolff & Nawroth (2020) only recommend cryopreservation in women with high ovarian reserve (AMH >1 ng/ml) and guide women with low reserve directly to ART [ 47 ]. Miller (2020) addresses the negative impact on ovarian function subsequent to surgery; cryopreservation is proposed as an option in the case of endometriomas larger than 3 cm [ 8 ]. Most recently, Dolmans & Donnez (2021) have discussed the strategy of ovarian tissue cryopreservation as an alternative to oocyte vitrification for fertility preservation in endometriosis, examining the indications and results of both options, and advise the use of ovarian tissue cryopreservation in all stage III and IV endometriosis patients where surgery is needed, AMH is low and the patient older than 30 years [ 53 ]. Table 2 Published algorithms for the management of fertility preservation in women with endometriosis. Publication Year Source Kho RM, et al [ 52 ] 2018 Summary of society guidelines Von Wolff M & Nawroth F [ 47 ] 2020 FertiPROTEKT Miller E [ 8 ] 2020 Systematic review Cosma S & Benedetto C [ 51 ] 2020 Publication Dolmans MM & Donnez J [ 53 ] 2021 Review and opinion paper With reference to these different algorithms, we distilled a proposed Europe-wide consensus algorithm to address the results of the survey (Figure 4 ) and in the author’s opinion it may help to harmonize the available ones. An algorithm should cover the patients at risk and thus we constructed it so that patients with higher risk for fertility problems have higher access to fertility preservation. As AFC is a more subjective measure, we did not include this in the algorithm, although some fertility specialists may continue to use AFC to assess ovarian reserve and, with experience, it can be cost-effective and equal to AMH. Age is an important parameter as some countries restrict access to ART above a certain age. As ’young‘ oocytes are of better quality with consequently higher rates of maturity, fertilisation and good quality blastocysts, it is important to stress that fertility preservation should be accessible also for younger women for improving live birth rate. Preservation of fertility in older women with endometriosis tends to be less successful and will result in increased costs of ART [ 54 , 55 ]. As a result of undertaking this survey and constructing a uniform algorithm, we believe that fertility outcomes for women with endometriosis can be improved. It must be recognised that the priority in endometriosis patients, regardless of age and stage, is to control progression of the disease (usually with medical treatment), without resorting to surgery that could reduce antral follicles. Patients should be informed of the influence of age on reproduction (encouraging the patient not to postpone pregnancy excessively) and their ovarian reserve. While quantifying antral follicles might be difficult in the context of an existing endometrioma, AMH determination is a good additional marker of follicular density [ 22 ]. Patients with endometriomas that require surgery should be informed of the risk that surgery imparts on their ovarian reserve, and that it would be appropriate to assess the need and possibility of performing follicular cell preservation before or after surgery. As ART and fertility preservation are not covered by health insurances in all European countries, this might have an impact on deciding for or against fertility preservation to postpone motherhood. The likely uptake of this proposal for fertility preservation in endometriosis based on a European survey and current literature is uncertain. No internationally recognised guidelines (i.e. ESHRE or ASRM) — which are important for disseminating and encouraging uptake of new developments in reproductive medicine — currently exist for fertility preservation with a focus on and clear recommendations for endometriosis patients. However, it should be appreciated that as early as 2015, endometriosis was already recognised as a potential indication for fertility preservation. A 20-person expert working group of ESHRE and ASRM highlighted the need to discuss and offer fertility preservation to patients with benign diseases causing premature ovarian insufficiency including autoimmune diseases (e.g. systemic lupus erythematosus, inflammatory bowel diseases, rheumatoid arthritis) and gynaecological conditions, including endometriosis [ 56 ]. The advice for fertility preservation in endometriosis has been repeated in more recent publications [ 1 ], but there remain no clear guidelines from the leading international specialist societies for its implementation in daily practice. At the time this manuscript was submitted, following standard procedures for updating the ESHRE guidelines, a draft was available in which to collect feedback from different stakeholders. In the draft available on 5 July 2021, it was stated that “In case of extensive ovarian endometriosis, clinicians should discuss the pros and cons of fertility preservation with women with endometriosis. The true benefit of fertility preservation in women with endometriosis remains unknown.” The statement was given a strong recommendation. The fertility problems with regard to endometriosis are however well known. More education and better awareness among healthcare professionals involved in managing women with endometriosis could facilitate counselling of patients on the risks of infertility and the available options for fertility preservation options. This can however be frustrated by unclear local legislation which can limit access to adequate support. The differences across Europe are large and, as the contradictory responses within the same country have shown, a lot of work will be required to address these inequalities. The support of European (e.g. European Society of Gynaecology (ESG), ESHRE, the FertiPROTEKT Network-and others) and local medical societies can play an important role by influencing legislators and creating awareness among gynaecologists, reproductive medicine specialists and patients. Reimbursement for fertility preservation does not depend on guidelines. As it is clear from this survey a huge discrepancy exists across Europe. However, the potential loss of fertility, especially in the case of advanced endometriosis (stage III or IV) or after surgery is well known. There are clear, published recommendations detailing the effectiveness of different options for fertility preservation that could be offered to those patients [ 53 , 57 ]. For example, compared to the management of women with oncological pathology, ovarian tissue cortex explantation plays a minor role in cryopreservation for women with endometriosis. This may be due to the perception in some countries that this technique is experimental, although the latest ASRM guidelines now endorse this procedure as an acceptable fertility preservation method [ 22 ]. With more than 200 live births reported, this technique certainly credits a place for fertility preservation [ 53 ]. Of course, medical criteria and individual circumstances will play a role on deciding which procedure is best suited for each patient. Therefore, the decision to preserve fertility in this type of patients deserves clear recommendations. 5. Conclusions The results of this survey of 58 European gynaecological surgeons and reproductive medicine specialists show a lack of uniformity in guidelines and practices to preserve fertility in women with endometriosis. Some aspects of endometriosis and fertility already show a good uptake, such as reduction of endometriomas before oocyte pick-up, but the availability of an endoscopic surgeon may be a limiting factor for some fertility centres. Large differences in fertility preservation strategies across Europe can be caused by multiple factors such as lack of access to surgery or fertility centres, lack of knowledge, unfamiliarity with procedures, absent or unclear regulations, or confusing guidelines. However, counselling for fertility preservation is becoming more relevant to endometriosis patients to maximise their chances of becoming pregnant and having a healthy baby during their reproductive life. The women’s age, stage of the disease, and previous surgical treatments may all result in a compromised ovarian reserve. Even in the absence of surgical intervention, ovarian reserve will still be negatively impacted over time. The intervention of European societies to create awareness and educate women and healthcare professionals is urgently needed, considering incidence, pathology, and surgical consequences of endometriosis. Abbreviations ACOG American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists AFC Antral follicular count AMH Anti-Müllerian hormone ART Assisted reproductive techniques ASRM American Society for Reproductive Medicine AWMF Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften CNGOF Collège National des Gynécologues et Obstétricien Français DGGG Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe ESHRE European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology FertiPROTEKT Network of fertility preservation centres in German-speaking countries FIGO International Federation Of Gynecology And Obstetrics FP fertility preservation FSH Follicle-stimulating hormone GnRH Gonadotropin-releasing hormone IVF In-vitro fertilization NICE National Institute for Health and Care SEF Sociedad Española de Fertilidad SIGO Italian Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics SOGC Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada WES World Endometriosis Society. Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate Not applicable. Consent for publication Not applicable. Availability of data and materials This was not an interventional study and no new patient data were created or analysed. Data sharing is not applicable to this article. Competing interests MM is employed by the funder of this survey, PregLem S.A., and contributed to the design of the survey and reviewed the manuscript. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest. Funding The survey platform was funded by PregLem (PregLem SA, Route de Frontenex 41A, 1207 Geneva, Switzerland) [a member of the Gedeon Richter group, Budapest, Hungary] and dispersed through the ORBIS-network across Europe. Authors’ contributions N.S. and J.V. conceived of the presented idea, developed the survey and performed the computations. N.S. and M.M. verified the analytical methods. All authors helped to shape the research, disseminate the survey and contributed to the analysis and interpretation of the results. N.S. took the lead in writing the manuscript and all authors provided critical feedback and contributed to the final manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Acknowledgements Editorial support and assistance in the preparation of figures was provided by Joanne Fitz-Gerald and Jonathan A C Lee at FourWave Medical Communications, the funding for which was provided by PregLem S.A./Gedeon Richter. References Donnez J, Dolmans MM. Fertility preservation in women. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1657–65. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1614676 . Rienzi L, Gracia C, Maggiulli R, LaBarbera AR, Kaser DJ, Ubaldi FM, Vanderpoel S, Racowsky C. Oocyte, embryo and blastocyst cryopreservation in ART: systematic review and meta-analysis comparing slow-freezing versus vitrification to produce evidence for the development of global guidance. Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23:139–55. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmw038 . Cobo A, Garcia-Velasco J, Domingo J, Pellicer A, Remohi J. Elective and onco-fertility preservation: factors related to IVF outcomes. Hum Reprod. 2018;33:2222–31. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dey321 . Somigliana E, Vigano P, Filippi F, Papaleo E, Benaglia L, Candiani M, Vercellini P. Fertility preservation in women with endometriosis: for all, for some, for none? Hum Reprod. 2015;30:1280–6. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dev078 . Horton J, Sterrenburg M, Lane S, Maheshwari A, Li TC, Cheong Y. Reproductive, obstetric, and perinatal outcomes of women with adenomyosis and endometriosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2019;25:592–632. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmz012 . Llarena NC, Falcone T, Flyckt RL. Fertility preservation in women with endometriosis. Clin Med Insights Reprod Health. 2019;13:1179558119873386. doi: 10.1177/1179558119873386 . Tanbo T, Fedorcsak P. Endometriosis-associated infertility: aspects of pathophysiological mechanisms and treatment options. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017;96:659–67. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13082 . Miller CE. The endometrioma treatment paradigm when fertility is desired: a systematic review. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2021;28:575–86. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2020.11.020 . Kitajima M, Defrère S, Dolmans MM, Colette S, Squifflet J, Van Langendonckt A, Donnez J. Endometriomas as a possible cause of reduced ovarian reserve in women with endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:685–91. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.06.064 . Kitajima M, Dolmans MM, Donnez O, Masuzaki H, Soares M, Donnez J. Enhanced follicular recruitment and atresia in cortex derived from ovaries with endometriomas. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:1031–7. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.049 . Kitajima M, Khan KN, Harada A, Taniguchi K, Inoue T, Kaneuchi M, Miura K, Masuzaki H. Association between ovarian endometrioma and ovarian reserve. Front Biosci (Elite Ed). 2018;10:92–102. doi: 10.2741/e810 . Bourdon M, Raad J, Dahan Y, Marcellin L, Maignien C, Even M, Pocate-Cheriet K, Lamau MC, Santulli P, Chapron C. Endometriosis and ART: A prior history of surgery for OMA is associated with a poor ovarian response to hyperstimulation. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0202399. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202399 . Liang Y, Yang X, Lan Y, Lei L, Li Y, Wang S. Effect of endometrioma cystectomy on cytokines of follicular fluid and IVF outcomes. J Ovarian Res. 2019;12:98. doi: 10.1186/s13048-019-0572-7 . Biacchiardi CP, Piane LD, Camanni M, Deltetto F, Delpiano EM, Marchino GL, Gennarelli G, Revelli A. Laparoscopic stripping of endometriomas negatively affects ovarian follicular reserve even if performed by experienced surgeons. Reprod Biomed Online. 2011;23:740–6. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.07.014 . Calagna G, Della Corte L, Giampaolino P, Maranto M, Perino A. Endometriosis and strategies of fertility preservation: a systematic review of the literature. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2020;254:218–25. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.09.045 . Karadağ C, Yoldemir T, Demircan Karadağ S, Turgut A. The effects of endometrioma size and bilaterality on ovarian reserve. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;40:531–6. doi: 10.1080/01443615.2019.1633518 . Somigliana E, Arnoldi M, Benaglia L, Iemmello R, Nicolosi AE, Ragni G. IVF-ICSI outcome in women operated on for bilateral endometriomas. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:1526–30. doi: 10.1093/humrep/den133 . Cranney R, Condous G, Reid S. An update on the diagnosis, surgical management, and fertility outcomes for women with endometrioma. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017;96:633–43. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13114 . Cobo A, Diaz C. Clinical application of oocyte vitrification: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:277–85. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.06.030 . Cobo A, Coello A, de Los Santos MJ, Giles J, Pellicer A, Remohí J, García-Velasco JA. Number needed to freeze: cumulative live birth rate after fertility preservation in women with endometriosis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2021;42:725–32. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.12.013 . Donnez J, Dolmans MM, Demylle D, Jadoul P, Pirard C, Squifflet J, Martinez-Madrid B, van Langendonckt A. Livebirth after orthotopic transplantation of cryopreserved ovarian tissue. Lancet. 2004;364:1405–10. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(04)17222-x . Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). Fertility preservation in patients undergoing gonadotoxic therapy or gonadectomy: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2019;112:1022–33. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.09.013 . Dong Z, An J, Xie X, Wang Z, Sun P. Preoperative serum anti-Müllerian hormone level is a potential predictor of ovarian endometrioma severity and postoperative fertility. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2019;240:113–20. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.06.024 . Cobo A, Giles J, Paolelli S, Pellicer A, Remohí J, García-Velasco JA. Oocyte vitrification for fertility preservation in women with endometriosis: an observational study. Fertil Steril. 2020;113:836–44. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.11.017 . Cobo A, García-Velasco JA, Remohí J, Pellicer A. Oocyte vitrification for fertility preservation for both medical and nonmedical reasons. Fertil Steril. 2021;115:1091–101. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.02.006 . Lessey BA, Gordts S, Donnez O, Somigliana E, Chapron C, Garcia-Velasco JA, Donnez J. Ovarian endometriosis and infertility: in vitro fertilization (IVF) or surgery as the first approach? Fertil Steril. 2018;110:1218–26. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.10.003 . Hirsch M, Begum MR, Paniz É, Barker C, Davis CJ, Duffy J. Diagnosis and management of endometriosis: a systematic review of international and national guidelines. BJOG. 2018;125:556–64. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.14838 . Kuroda K, Ikemoto Y, Ochiai A, Ozaki R, Matsumura Y, Nojiri S, Nakagawa K, Sugiyama R. Combination treatment of preoperative embryo cryopreservation and endoscopic surgery (surgery-ART hybrid therapy) in infertile women with diminished ovarian reserve and uterine myomas or ovarian endometriomas. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2019;26:1369–75. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2019.02.008 . Dadoun Y, Azaïs H, Keller L, d'Orazio E, Collinet P, Decanter C. [Systematic proposal of fertility preservation by mature oocyte cryopreservation for recurrent benign ovarian tumors]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2017;45:359–65. doi: 10.1016/j.gofs.2017.03.005 . Decanter C, d'Argent EM, Boujenah J, Poncelet C, Chauffour C, Collinet P, Santulli P. [Endometriosis and fertility preservation: CNGOF-HAS Endometriosis Guidelines]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2018;46:368–72. doi: 10.1016/j.gofs.2018.02.010 . Haydardedeoglu B, Zeyneloglu HB. The impact of endometriosis on fertility. Womens Health (Lond). 2015;11:619–23. doi: 10.2217/whe.15.48 . Björk E, Gustavsson M, Palmstierna M, Valentin A, Olovsson M, Melin AS [Endometriosis - new clinical guidelines for better and equal care in Sweden]. Lakartidningen 2020, 117 . Nnoaham KE, Hummelshoj L, Webster P, d'Hooghe T, de Cicco Nardone F, de Cicco Nardone C, Jenkinson C, Kennedy SH, Zondervan KT. Impact of endometriosis on quality of life and work productivity: a multicenter study across ten countries. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:366–73.e368. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.05.090 . Evans MB, Decherney AH. Fertility and endometriosis. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;60:497–502. doi: 10.1097/grf.0000000000000295 . Lebovic DI, Mueller MD, Taylor RN. Immunobiology of endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2001;75:1–10. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(00)01630-7 . Kao LC, Germeyer A, Tulac S, Lobo S, Yang JP, Taylor RN, Osteen K, Lessey BA, Giudice LC. Expression profiling of endometrium from women with endometriosis reveals candidate genes for disease-based implantation failure and infertility. Endocrinology. 2003;144:2870–81. doi: 10.1210/en.2003-0043 . Marie-Madeleine D, Camille H, Luciana C, Glenn S. Summary of the ISFP congress, New York, 14-16 November, 2019. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020;37:983–5. doi: 10.1007/s10815-020-01757-y . American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Practice bulletin no. 114: management of endometriosis. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116:223–36. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181e8b073 . Leyland N, Casper R, Laberge P, Singh SS. Endometriosis: diagnosis and management. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2010;32:1–32. Dunselman GA, Vermeulen N, Becker C, Calhaz-Jorge C, D'Hooghe T, De Bie B, Heikinheimo O, Horne AW, Kiesel L, Nap A, et al. ESHRE guideline: management of women with endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:400–12. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det457 . Anderson RA, Amant F, Braat D, D'Angelo A, Chuva deS, Lopes SM, Demeestere I, Dwek S, Frith L, Lambertini M, Maslin C, et al. ESHRE guideline: female fertility preservation. Hum Reprod Open 2020, 2020 , hoaa052, doi: 10.1093/hropen/hoaa052 . Adamson GD, Endometriosis. Medical and Surgical Management of Pain and Infertility. Available online: https://www.figo.org/sites/default/files/2020-07/Endometriosis%20Slides%202016%20-%20Rep%20Med.pdf (accessed on 5 March 2021). Johnson NP, Hummelshoj L, Adamson GD, Keckstein J, Taylor HS, Abrao MS, Bush D, Kiesel L, Tamimi R, Sharpe-Timms KL, et al. World Endometriosis Society consensus on the classification of endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2017;32:315–24. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dew293 . Collinet P, Fritel X, Revel-Delhom C, Ballester M, Bolze PA, Borghese B, Bornsztein N, Boujenah J, Brillac T, Chabbert-Buffet N, et al. Management of endometriosis: CNGOF/HAS clinical practice guidelines - Short version. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2018;47:265–74. doi: 10.1016/j.jogoh.2018.06.003 . AWMF Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften. Leitlinie Diagnostik und Therapie der Endometriose [German guideline for diagnosis and management of endometriosis]. Available online: https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/awmf-regelwerk (accessed on 5 March 2021). AWMF Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften. Leitlinie Fertilitätserhalt [German guideline for fertility preservation]. Available online: https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/awmf-regelwerk (accessed on 5 March 2021). von Wolff M, Nawroth F Fertility Preservation in Oncological and Non-Oncological Diseases: A Practical Guide , 1st ed.; Springer: 2020. SIGO Società Italiana di Ginecologia e Obstetrica. Diagnosi e Trattamento dell'Endometriosi [Diagnosis and Treatment of Endometriosis]. June 2018. Available online: https://www.aogoi.it/media/5066/lg_diagnositrattamentoendometriosi-2018.pdf (accessed on 5 March 2021). SEF Sociedad Española de Fertilidad. Manejo de la paciente con endometriosis durante la edad fértil [Management of endometriosis in women of childbearing age]. Available online: https://www.sefertilidad.net/docs/biblioteca/manejoEndometriosis.pdf (accessed on 5 March 2021). NICE. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Endometriosis: diagnosis and management. NICE guideline (NG73). Available online: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng73/resources/endometriosis-diagnosis-and-management-pdf-1837632548293 and https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/NG73 (accessed on 5 March 2020). Cosma S, Benedetto C. Classification algorithm of patients with endometriosis: proposal for tailored management. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2020;29:615–22. doi: 10.17219/acem/118849 . Kho RM, Andres MP, Borrelli GM, Neto JS, Zanluchi A, Abrão MS. Surgical treatment of different types of endometriosis: Comparison of major society guidelines and preferred clinical algorithms. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;51:102–10. doi: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2018.01.020 . Dolmans MM, Donnez J. Fertility preservation in women for medical and social reasons: Oocytes vs ovarian tissue. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2021;70:63–80. doi: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2020.06.011 . Dolmans MM, Manavella DD. Recent advances in fertility preservation. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2019;45:266–79. doi: 10.1111/jog.13818 . Cobo A, García-Velasco JA, Coello A, Domingo J, Pellicer A, Remohí J. Oocyte vitrification as an efficient option for elective fertility preservation. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:755–64.e758. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.11.027 . Martinez F. Update on fertility preservation from the Barcelona International Society for Fertility Preservation-ESHRE-ASRM 2015 expert meeting: indications, results and future perspectives. Hum Reprod. 2017;32:1802–11. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dex218 . Barnett R, Banks N, Decherney AH. Endometriosis and fertility preservation. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;60:517–23. doi: 10.1097/grf.0000000000000311 . Supplementary Files SupplementaryMaterials.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-966804","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":58705900,"identity":"c426280c-53bc-4364-b887-cf72ca4b4bdc","order_by":0,"name":"Nicole Sänger","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University Bonn","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Nicole","middleName":"","lastName":"Sänger","suffix":""},{"id":58705901,"identity":"d9fb9ecd-c2b8-4915-9960-b0d566693d45","order_by":1,"name":"Marco Menabrito","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Gedeon Richter / Preglem s.a.","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Marco","middleName":"","lastName":"Menabrito","suffix":""},{"id":58705902,"identity":"5ca59111-b827-4869-90fe-27cce21334f2","order_by":2,"name":"Atillio Di Spiezo Di Spiezo Sardo","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University Naples","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Atillio","middleName":"Di Spiezo Di Spiezo","lastName":"Sardo","suffix":""},{"id":58705903,"identity":"aad4732a-7d94-43b4-b03b-b740db5f9037","order_by":3,"name":"Josep Estadella","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University Barcelona","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Josep","middleName":"","lastName":"Estadella","suffix":""},{"id":58705904,"identity":"eb5e3692-8fbb-4748-8d93-8fd1ec6668af","order_by":4,"name":"Jasper Verguts","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2185-1213","institution":"Jessa Hospital","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jasper","middleName":"","lastName":"Verguts","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2021-10-13 11:19:31","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-966804/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-966804/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":14952297,"identity":"98fbac68-ec0d-4b64-b192-d5da3a059b62","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-10-27 15:25:57","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":70364,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"Participating centres by country.","description":"","filename":"Fig01.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-966804/v1/10e31d0536d6b538054e021c.png"},{"id":14953014,"identity":"17d64260-30b3-421b-bbf3-ac4adf415cfe","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-10-27 15:31:57","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":40123,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"Does a national endometriosis guideline exist in your country?","description":"","filename":"Fig02.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-966804/v1/8e2d05c28177c50da87640ec.png"},{"id":14952811,"identity":"a7f5c206-6853-4a3e-a86e-7aef824b0779","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-10-27 15:28:57","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":26879,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"If fertility preservation is suggested to patients (with a partner) with endometriosis, what is the method performed in your clinic? (Responses by centre, N=58).","description":"","filename":"Fig03.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-966804/v1/1c530e56b378e5abe24b8e87.png"},{"id":14952298,"identity":"d04b0d89-7f5d-4b50-82f4-35389422466b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-10-27 15:25:57","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":39918,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"Proposed algorithm for the management of fertility preservation in women with endometriosis. AFC, antral follicular count; AMH, anti-Müllerian hormone.","description":"","filename":"Fig04.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-966804/v1/ddcde4f76e76ab47698e1f81.png"},{"id":14953015,"identity":"c2416389-b5f6-4a3f-98c3-a6bb122f5909","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-10-27 15:32:00","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":765130,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-966804/v1/5f9cfc4a-a869-4bbf-9bfe-5d4a1432e6e8.pdf"},{"id":14952812,"identity":"2862bbaa-c3d9-4847-b612-93ed9475b3de","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-10-27 15:28:57","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":15314,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"SupplementaryMaterials.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-966804/v1/e57a99731b3cd4e9173139b4.docx"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003eFertility Preservation Counselling for Women With Endometriosis: A European Online Survey\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Plain English Summary","content":"\u003cp\u003eWomen with endometriosis may have a decreased chance of pregnancy where cryopreservation could be beneficial to maintain fecundity. An online survey involving reproductive specialists and gynaecological surgeons was carried out to assess the current situation in Europe regarding the management of women with endometriosis seeking fertility. Within the 58 respondents there was a diversity of treatment options. Although some guidelines exist, there is clearly a lack of uniformity. One in six centers did not offer any fertility preservation in women with endometriosis. We propose an algorithm that could help women with severe endometriosis to maintain fertility. As awareness on this topic would increase, more women could benefit from an improved cooperation between gynaecological surgeons and fertility specialists.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"1. Background","content":"\u003cp\u003eFertility preservation of oocytes and embryos has been used for several years. Its efficacy and safety have been demonstrated not only in women requiring gonadotoxic therapies due to malignant diseases, but also in other circumstances that threaten the ovarian reserve, such as endometriosis [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR2 CR3\" citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEndometriosis is a common chronic inflammatory condition of the pelvis, which can lead to dysmenorrhoea, chronic pelvic pain and infertility. It is an oestrogen-dependent disease that affects up to 10% of women during their reproductive life. Fertility issues are present in approximately 30\u0026ndash;50% of endometriosis patients, with both pathologic and iatrogenic causes [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePathologic causes of infertility associated with endometriosis include dysfunctional uterine and tubular peristaltic motility, chronic intraperitoneal inflammation, disturbed folliculogenesis, luteinized unruptured follicles, luteal phase defects, progesterone resistance and anti-endometrial antibodies [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e]. With large endometriomas, loss of follicular density can occur secondary to stretching of the ovarian cortex and additional gonadotoxic insult can result from iron uptake from cells near the endometrioma. Local inflammation leads to fibrosis and loss of cortex-specific stroma and might be associated with reduced vascularisation and increased oxidative stress, resulting in atresia, \u0026ldquo;burn-out\u0026rdquo; of the ovary and a reduced follicular count [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR9 CR10\" citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e]. Surgical management of endometriosis can also have a detrimental effect on ovarian reserve [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e]. The surgical removal of endometriotic lesions may cause iatrogenic adnexal or follicular damage when removing ovarian endometriomas and pelvic adhesions, even in the hands of highly skilled surgeons [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThus, while fertility treatment is frequently sought among women with endometriosis, the outcomes of assisted reproductive techniques (ART) may be impaired due to fewer oocytes and poor oocyte quality. Indeed, there is a negative correlation between the size of the endometriomas and anti-M\u0026uuml;llerian hormone (AMH) levels, and patients with bilateral endometriomas have a lower AMH than those with unilateral endometriomas [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e]. These factors can affect the ovarian response to stimulation in ART, leading to use of increased follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) doses [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR17\" citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese issues highlight a need for fertility preservation strategies to protect follicular capital in women with endometriosis before the condition advances or surgical treatment compromises ovarian function. Cryopreservation of fertilized oocytes for use in later embryo transfer cycles shows comparable rates of fertilization, embryo development and pregnancy rates to freshly transferred embryos in patients with endometriosis [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e]. Cryopreservation of ovarian cortex, first described by Donnez et al (2004) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e] is another technique that has become increasingly accepted for fertility preservation and endorsed by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn women with ovarian endometriomas, pre-operative assessment of AMH and antral follicular count (AFC) are relevant before a planned surgical treatment, as women with advanced stage endometriosis tend to have a lower serum AMH levels and because postoperative infertility is more likely to occur in older patients with a lower level of serum AMH per se [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. A negative effect of age, number of vitrified oocytes and oocyte survival on the cumulative life-birth-rate was recently confirmed in a large series of endometriosis patients that underwent fertility preservation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e]. Results from this group indicate that 20 or more vitrified oocytes would be needed to achieve at least one life birth after fertility preservation in an endometriosis patient [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e], a goal that might be reachable in younger patients within one or two controlled ovarian stimulations. In women older than 35 years and perhaps for surgeries that have already taken place due to endometriosis cysts or implants, this number would be impossible to attain [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e]. Therefore, fertility preservation counselling should be offered before endometriosis surgery in some conditions, when the risks of deleterious effect on the ovarian reserve are obvious. Depending on the disease stage, it could also be advisable to perform surgical excision of endometriomas before ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e]. Despite the known potential risks of impaired fertility with endometriosis, not all physicians take fertility preservation into account when planning therapeutic options as no clear clinical guidelines for endometriosis and fertility preservation exist in most countries. A review of national and international guidelines on diagnosis and therapy of endometriosis shows contradicting recommendations on whether IVF or surgery should be performed as the first approach in endometriosis patients, and fertility preservation does not have a significant place in the guidelines, even in patients with severe endometriosis [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhether a patient receives fertility counselling may depend on the type (surgeon or a fertility specialist) and expertise of the physician to whom she is first referred. A published debate among surgical gynaecologists and reproductive medicine specialists illustrates that the approach to managing endometriosis patients varies enormously [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e]. The surgeons\u0026rsquo; viewpoint is that diagnostic laparoscopy will confirm an early diagnosis, reduce pain and improves the natural conception rate, enabling the patient to receive optimal further treatment after a pregnancy. Reproductive medicine specialists advocate IVF as the initial strategy because it will shorten the time to pregnancy and avoid any adverse influence of surgery on the ovarian reserve. Alongside these opposing approaches, the possibility of maintaining fertility by cryopreservation of fertilized or unfertilized oocytes was mentioned by only one of the panellists in this debate [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLikewise, communications between treatment centres and patients about options for fertility preservation are lacking, since not all institutions offer elective fertility preservation or have protocols to guide patients for fertility counselling [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e]. For young patients however the feasibility of a systematic proposal of fertility preservation by oocyte cryopreservation has already been demonstrated and an oocyte accumulation strategy was proposed to enhance further pregnancy chances [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR30\" citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe therefore conducted a European survey to investigate the existence of local guidelines regarding endometriosis surgery and fertility preservation, to evaluate if centres/hospitals are offering this possibility, and if so, which techniques are used, and how these are performed.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Materials And Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003eA 19-item questionnaire (see Appendix A) was developed, agreed, and tested among all the authors. It was hosted on an online survey platform (SurveyMonkey). The questions included either multiple-choice or single-response answers. The questionnaire was sent to gynaecological surgeons and fertility specialists through the ORBIS network, an international collaborative group of gynaecologists specialized in diseases such as fibroids and endometriosis that can impair infertility.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe questionnaire was distributed between December 2019 and March 2020 and again between January 2021 until March 2021 to increase the response-rate. It was distributed by email to major centres of reproductive medicine across Europe and directly to medical colleagues. It was also advertised on social media including Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, and included in newsletters of gynaecological and fertility centres/ hospitals.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe planned to have at least one response from every country to provide a European overview on the current situation.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eA total of 61 responses were collected from 13 European countries. Three were excluded due to double entries from the same institution. Thus, responses from a total of 58 European fertility centres/hospitals (30 public, 22 private and 6 are not available) were evaluated, of which 18 were university hospitals and/or fertility centres with a high number of IVF cycles (\u0026gt;500 cycles, n=17; \u0026gt;1000 cycles: n=14; Figure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Seven centres do not perform any ART but offer endometriosis treatments and surgery.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1. Endometriosis guidelines\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOf particular interest was whether a national endometriosis guideline existed in the countries that responded, and whether such guidelines included treatment options both for infertile patients and for fertility preservation. The majority of respondents (n=45, 77.6%) affirmed an existing guideline for endometriosis, including centres in Germany, Spain, Italy, Denmark, the Netherlands and the UK. Thirteen (22.4%) respondents stated there were no national guidelines at all on endometriosis; these included centres in Belgium, France, Portugal, Austria, Switzerland, Finland and Sweden, though Swedish national guidelines were published in June 2020 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e], which was after our first survey period. Several of these countries, however, reported contradictory answers towards the availability of an endometriosis guideline (Figure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e), suggesting that even where guidelines are available, they are not followed universally. Of respondents who were aware of a national guideline for endometriosis, 37/45 (82.2%) reported that treatment recommendations for infertile patients were included.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2. Fertility preservation in endometriosis patients\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSince treatment using ART is common in infertile patients, we focused our questions in this study on fertility preservation, especially in patients with severe stage III and IV endometriosis and the desire to have children. Overall, 84.5% of centres offered elective fertility preservation to some or all women with endometriosis; this was to all patients with endometriosis (32.8%), only patients with large endometriomas (29.3%), or in some centres, only where large endometrioma was combined with deep infiltrating endometriosis (22.4%). Only 15.5% of centres did not offer any treatment for fertility preservation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmong centres that offered fertility preservation for endometriosis patients, multiple criteria were used to support this decision, the most common being age of the patient (81.0%) and a reduced ovarian reserve (75.9%). \"Previous uni- or bilateral endometriomas with or without surgery\u0026rdquo; (55.2%), \u0026ldquo;delayed fertility wish\u0026rdquo; (55.2%) and \"risk of losing time by surgery and recovery\" (46.6%) were also important factors. Six centres did not offer fertility preservation in case of low ovarian reserve parameters or due to the absence of standard operation procedures for fertility preservation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the case of large endometriomas (\u0026ge;4 cm), 50.0% of centres reported that they would perform medical or surgical interventions before ovarian stimulation to facilitate oocyte pick-up, usually laparoscopic cystectomy or ablation (depending on size and thickness of the cystic wall). One centre uses progestin only ahead of controlled ovarian stimulation; two centres use gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists only; and two centres offer first-line GnRH agonists followed by laparoscopic surgery. In respondent centres in France, an intraoperative treatment with ethanol is used in cases of large endometrioma, and hormonal treatment combined with antibiotics is used in centres from Austria and the United Kingdom.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn France, an intraoperative treatment with ethanol is used in cases of large endometrioma, and hormonal treatment combined with antibiotics is used in Austria and the United Kingdom.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNearly all respondents (89.3%) confirmed that they measured ovarian reserve with AMH, AFC and/or FSH before planning an individual treatment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3. Therapeutic options in fertility preservation\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe preferred protocol for fertility preservation in endometriosis among responding centres is cryopreservation of unfertilized oocytes (31 centres, 53.4%) (Figure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). For cryopreservation, most centres routinely perform vitrification (84.5%), while the others use the slow freezing method.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe difference among countries in the permitted storage period for cryopreserved embryos or unfertilized egg cells is remarkable. While there is reportedly no time limit in most respondent centres (e.g., Austria, Germany, and Italy), storage time is limited in centres in Portugal (10 years), Belgium (until maternal age 43 years), Sweden (10 years), France and the United Kingdom. As for responses to other questions, there were some discrepancies from different centres in the same country. In Belgium, a storage period of 5 years was indicated by one centre, and a storage time to age 43 years by another, where the two answers may not be mutually exclusive. Similarly, in the United Kingdom, responses suggested there is a maximum storage period of 10 years up to a maximum age of 55. In France, the centres provided contradicting information regarding restrictions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCentres from Belgium, Finland, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain all reported an age limit for performing embryo transfer, which varies between 43 and 55 years. There was no reported age restriction for embryo transfer in centres from Austria, France, Germany and Italy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe most frequently used protocol for controlled ovarian stimulation before oocyte pick-up and storage was the antagonist protocol, used in 44.8% of the fertility centres. Interestingly, only 5 centres (8.6%) worked with the ultra-long protocol using GnRH agonists, 6 centres (10.3%) performed the classic long protocol and only one centre specified a natural cycle as their preferred approach. However, 34.5% of all fertility centres indicated individual therapy planning, so that the use of GnRH agonists might be part of the protocol, if required.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.4. Post-surgery waiting time\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSince evidence is lacking about the optimal waiting time between endometriosis surgery and fertility treatment or pregnancy, we were also interested in the opinion of the respondents about this topic. Half of the respondents (28 centres, 48.3%) allowed pregnancy immediately after surgery, 24 centres (41.4%) would recommend waiting for at least three months and 6 centres would recommend waiting up to 6 months before allowing pregnancy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.5. Medical treatment between surgery and pregnancy\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eNearly eighty-three percent of respondents would consider offering drug therapy after surgery for endometriosis, usually oral contraceptives (62.7%) or GnRH-agonists (20.1%). The remaining 17.2% of respondents answered there is no need or indication for adjuvant therapy after surgery. Where oral contraceptives were advised, the most-preferred were progestin-only-pills (41.4% of all respondents) or combined oral contraceptives with a long cycle regime (44.8%).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.6. Economic costs\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe last question looked at cost coverage of fertility preservation as part of the national system or by health insurance companies. Thirty-nine respondents (67.2%) reported that no coverage for fertility preservation is available. Countries where some form of reimbursement exist are Italy, France, Finland and Sweden. In Germany, public funding was approved in May 2019, to cover fertility preservation by cryopreservation of fertilized or unfertilized oocytes, but not for ovarian cortex storage; however, the guidelines that determine the amount of funding that will be covered and for which type of patient is still to be agreed. Once more, we obtained conflicting information from different centres within Belgium, Spain and the United Kingdom.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first European survey on the availability and practice of fertility preservation in women with endometriosis. Many studies have addressed the issue of decreased fertility associated with endometriosis, but no uniform guidelines are in place for the implementation of fertility preservation in clinical practice. Moreover, where guidelines do exist, they are not consistently recognised. While some centres adhere to local or national guidelines, it was evident from discrepant responses to some questions among centres from the same countries that there is inconsistency in practices relating to management of infertility associated with endometriosis and provision of fertility preservation, and in limitations placed on them. A more uniform guideline is needed that is based on the available clinical evidence and is relevant for women across Europe. Every experienced gynaecologist is aware that both the condition of endometriosis and surgical treatments to manage it can significantly impair ovarian reserve. Although thousands of women across Europe are treated for endometriosis every day, the option of maintaining fertility plays a subordinate role. In addition to the organic changes in the ovary that occur especially in stage III and IV endometriosis, the advancing age at which many women now choose to try for a first pregnancy further increases the difficulty of achieving a successful reproductive outcome. Collectively, therefore it is surprizing that there are few clear and uniform guidelines that anticipate the risk of declining fertility and provide timely treatment recommendations for preserving fertility.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis survey shows there is a need for guidelines to encourage fertility preservation in women with endometriosis before loss of ovarian reserve, with a focus on management of patients with bilateral endometriomas or those requiring multiple surgical interventions, in whom ovarian impact is greatest. Factors such as age, AMH and AFC, are of paramount importance to determine the most appropriate procedure and timing for the best chances of success. Undoubtedly, when considering the possibility of fertility preservation before planning endometriosis surgery, the younger the patient the better the results will be in terms of, for example, oocyte survival and cumulative live-birth-rate [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e]. The cost-effectiveness of treatment and the calculation of costs by the health insurance company must not be disregarded. Two-thirds of respondents in the survey reported that there was no financial coverage for the provision of fertility preservation services in their country, although there were some conflicting responses on this point.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith around 180 million women affected with endometriosis worldwide [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e], a substantial effort would need to be made to implement a new guideline effectively, including changes in routine patient counselling pathways. A clear communication between gynaecologists performing surgery and reproductive medicine specialists is mandatory to increase the patient\u0026apos;s likelihood of accessing services and having a baby. It is also important to remember that reproductive medicine has its limits, and can only help efficiently against the disruption of folliculogenesis caused by endometriosis, reduced sperm transport, chronic inflammation or even implantation defects due to decreased embryo receptivity [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe present survey was intended to provide an insight into the extent to which fertility preservation plays a role in the management of endometriosis patients in clinical practice and whether there are significant differences across Europe. However, the study is limited in the relatively small number of respondents and the lack of representation of some countries and it has no claim to provide a complete picture of endometriosis therapy in individual countries. Two rounds of the survey were necessary to attain a valid response-rate (28 responses the first round and 33 on the second. The fact that some centres disregarded the survey might suggest a general disinterest in this issue, which for women with endometriosis who struggle with infertility may seem discouraging. As indeed few centers in our survey follow guidelines regarding endometriosis and fertility preservation, many other centers will also have no interest and no guidelines and thus no respond to this survey. This is yet another reason why this survey is important for women with endometriosis. However, there are many factors that could influence the response rate to a survey of this type, other than actual interest in the topic.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn view of the responses in the first and second round however, we found little or no differences, indicating that the responses obtained provided good representation of the fertility preservation practices in endometriosis across Europe. The high representation of Germany in the study \u0026mdash; one-third of all responses \u0026mdash; is striking, although it was not considered to be a confounding factor as the survey was designed mostly to evaluate local practices rather than to provide country-level responses.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results of the survey revealed a heterogeneity across centres in Europe in counselling on fertility preservation and treating patients of reproductive age suffering from endometriosis. This may be due to differing or absent national guidelines, as well as a lack of standardized procedures and cooperation between surgical centres and fertility centres. It was notable that in some cases, specialists were unaware of the existence of guidelines available in their country.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn fact, over the past 10 years, guidelines for fertility preservation or diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis have been published in almost all European societies for gynaecology and obstetrics, and include recommendations from ESHRE, NICE, DGGG/ AWMF, SEF, CNGOF and SIGO, alongside globally recognised guidelines from ACOG, FIGO and WES (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). In the guidelines for fertility preservation, no information is given explicitly for endometriosis patients and, conversely, the endometriosis recommendations rarely contain a clear statement regarding counselling and/or implementation of fertility maintenance. Seven out of 15 societies recommend the regular determination of the fertility parameters AMH and AFC and provide medical and surgical therapeutic options for those wishing to conceive (9/15). More than half of the published statements also consider that advice should be given on the potential impairment of the ovarian reserve (8/15), but without providing precise information about scenarios where fertility-preserving options such as freezing of oocytes or ovarian tissue is indicated. Indeed, the topic was intensively discussed for the first time in a plenary session at the 6th Biennial World Congress of the International Society for Fertility Preservation (ISFP) in New York, 2019, confirming the importance and increasing recognition of the place of fertility preservation in women with benign diseases such as endometriosis [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable border=\"1\" id=\"Tab1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAvailable international guidelines and recommendations on endometriosis, infertility and fertility preservation.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCountry/regional guideline\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e[reference]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYear\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInstitute/ Group/\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSociety\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMeasurement\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eof fertility\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eparameters prior to surgery?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRecommenda-tions for\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003einfertile\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003epatients?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRecommenda-tions on\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003efertility\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003epreservation?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSurgery prior to\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIVF?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUSA: Endometriosis\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2010\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eACOG\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIVF not listed\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCanada\u0026nbsp;: Endometriosis\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2010\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSOGC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn case of pain and endometriomas \u0026gt;3cm\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEurope: Endometriosis\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2014\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eESHRE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn case of pain and\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eendometriomas \u0026gt;3cm\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEurope: Female fertility\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003epreservation [41]\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2020\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eESHRE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo, as diseases are not listed individually\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInternational: Endometriosis\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003epain and infertility [42]\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2016\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFIGO\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn case of pain and\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eendometriomas \u0026gt;3-4cm\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInternational: Endometriosis\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2017\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWES\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFrance: Endometriosis\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2018\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCNGOF\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGermany: Endometriosis\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2020\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDGGG/ AWMF\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGermany: Fertility preservation\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2017\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDGGG/ AWMF\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEndometriosis not listed in this guideline\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGermany, Switzerland, Austria: Fertility preservation\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2020\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFerti-PROTEKT\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eItaly: Endometriosis\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2018\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSIGO\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes in case of pain but not obligatory\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSpain: Endometriosis, women\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eof childbearing age [49]\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2018\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSEF\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOnly in case of rapid growth or pain\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUK: Endometriosis\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2017\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNICE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLessey 2018: Ovarian\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eendometriosis \u0026amp; infertility [26]\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2018\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePublication/ debate\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eyes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOnly 1/5 discussants recommended FP\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCosma 2020: Classification of\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eendometriosis [51]\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2020\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReview\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOnly in symptomatic patients and abnormal fertility tests\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMiller 2020: Endometrioma and fertility\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2020\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSystematic review\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eACOG, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; AWMF, Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften (Association of the Scientific Medical Societies); CNGOF, Coll\u0026egrave;ge National des Gyn\u0026eacute;cologues et Obst\u0026eacute;tricien Fran\u0026ccedil;ais; DGGG, Deutsche Gesellschaft f\u0026uuml;r Gyn\u0026auml;kologie und Geburtshilfe (German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics ); ESHRE, European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology; FertiPROTEKT, Network of fertility preservation centres in German-speaking countries; FIGO, International Federation Of Gynecology And Obstetrics; FP, fertility preservation; NICE, (United Kingdom) National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; IVF, in vitro fertilization; SEF, Sociedad Espa\u0026ntilde;ola de Fertilidad (Spanish Fertility Society); SIGO, Italian Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics; SOGC, Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada; WES, World Endometriosis Society.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDuring the survey, we also decided to review the literature for potential algorithms on fertility preservation and endometriosis. Five proposed algorithms for fertility preservation and endometriosis were identified in the recent literature (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e]. While the publication of such recommendations is to be welcomed, their approach is heterogeneous, with selection criteria focussing variously on age, low AMH and the presence of endometriomas. Cosma et al. (2020) do not implement cryopreservation as a routine strategy in their algorithm, but state that it can be an option in selected cases with previous ovarian surgery or low AMH (near 1 ng/ml) [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e]. The algorithm of Kho et al. (2018) looks at AMH and AFC when endometriosis is associated with concomitant fertility problems [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e]; when poor ovarian reserve is encountered in women \u0026gt;30 years of age, gamete preservation is offered before surgical treatment. von Wolff \u0026amp; Nawroth (2020) only recommend cryopreservation in women with high ovarian reserve (AMH \u0026gt;1 ng/ml) and guide women with low reserve directly to ART [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e]. Miller (2020) addresses the negative impact on ovarian function subsequent to surgery; cryopreservation is proposed as an option in the case of endometriomas larger than 3 cm [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e]. Most recently, Dolmans \u0026amp; Donnez (2021) have discussed the strategy of ovarian tissue cryopreservation as an alternative to oocyte vitrification for fertility preservation in endometriosis, examining the indications and results of both options, and advise the use of ovarian tissue cryopreservation in all stage III and IV endometriosis patients where surgery is needed, AMH is low and the patient older than 30 years [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable border=\"1\" id=\"Tab2\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePublished algorithms for the management of fertility preservation in women with endometriosis.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePublication\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYear\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSource\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKho RM, et al\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2018\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSummary of society guidelines\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVon Wolff M \u0026amp; Nawroth F\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2020\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFertiPROTEKT\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMiller E\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2020\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSystematic review\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCosma S \u0026amp; Benedetto C\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2020\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePublication\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDolmans MM \u0026amp; Donnez J\u003c/strong\u003e [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2021\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReview and opinion paper\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith reference to these different algorithms, we distilled a proposed Europe-wide consensus algorithm to address the results of the survey (Figure \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) and in the author\u0026rsquo;s opinion it may help to harmonize the available ones. An algorithm should cover the patients at risk and thus we constructed it so that patients with higher risk for fertility problems have higher access to fertility preservation. As AFC is a more subjective measure, we did not include this in the algorithm, although some fertility specialists may continue to use AFC to assess ovarian reserve and, with experience, it can be cost-effective and equal to AMH. Age is an important parameter as some countries restrict access to ART above a certain age. As \u0026rsquo;young\u0026lsquo; oocytes are of better quality with consequently higher rates of maturity, fertilisation and good quality blastocysts, it is important to stress that fertility preservation should be accessible also for younger women for improving live birth rate. Preservation of fertility in older women with endometriosis tends to be less successful and will result in increased costs of ART [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e54\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e55\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs a result of undertaking this survey and constructing a uniform algorithm, we believe that fertility outcomes for women with endometriosis can be improved. It must be recognised that the priority in endometriosis patients, regardless of age and stage, is to control progression of the disease (usually with medical treatment), without resorting to surgery that could reduce antral follicles. Patients should be informed of the influence of age on reproduction (encouraging the patient not to postpone pregnancy excessively) and their ovarian reserve. While quantifying antral follicles might be difficult in the context of an existing endometrioma, AMH determination is a good additional marker of follicular density [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e]. Patients with endometriomas that require surgery should be informed of the risk that surgery imparts on their ovarian reserve, and that it would be appropriate to assess the need and possibility of performing follicular cell preservation before or after surgery. As ART and fertility preservation are not covered by health insurances in all European countries, this might have an impact on deciding for or against fertility preservation to postpone motherhood.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe likely uptake of this proposal for fertility preservation in endometriosis based on a European survey and current literature is uncertain. No internationally recognised guidelines (i.e. ESHRE or ASRM) \u0026mdash; which are important for disseminating and encouraging uptake of new developments in reproductive medicine \u0026mdash; currently exist for fertility preservation with a focus on and clear recommendations for endometriosis patients. However, it should be appreciated that as early as 2015, endometriosis was already recognised as a potential indication for fertility preservation. A 20-person expert working group of ESHRE and ASRM highlighted the need to discuss and offer fertility preservation to patients with benign diseases causing premature ovarian insufficiency including autoimmune diseases (e.g. systemic lupus erythematosus, inflammatory bowel diseases, rheumatoid arthritis) and gynaecological conditions, including endometriosis [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e]. The advice for fertility preservation in endometriosis has been repeated in more recent publications [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e], but there remain no clear guidelines from the leading international specialist societies for its implementation in daily practice.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAt the time this manuscript was submitted, following standard procedures for updating the ESHRE guidelines, a draft was available in which to collect feedback from different stakeholders. In the draft available on 5 July 2021, it was stated that \u0026ldquo;In case of extensive ovarian endometriosis, clinicians should discuss the pros and cons of fertility preservation with women with endometriosis. The true benefit of fertility preservation in women with endometriosis remains unknown.\u0026rdquo; The statement was given a strong recommendation. The fertility problems with regard to endometriosis are however well known. More education and better awareness among healthcare professionals involved in managing women with endometriosis could facilitate counselling of patients on the risks of infertility and the available options for fertility preservation options. This can however be frustrated by unclear local legislation which can limit access to adequate support. The differences across Europe are large and, as the contradictory responses within the same country have shown, a lot of work will be required to address these inequalities. The support of European (e.g. European Society of Gynaecology (ESG), ESHRE, the FertiPROTEKT Network-and others) and local medical societies can play an important role by influencing legislators and creating awareness among gynaecologists, reproductive medicine specialists and patients.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eReimbursement for fertility preservation does not depend on guidelines. As it is clear from this survey a huge discrepancy exists across Europe. However, the potential loss of fertility, especially in the case of advanced endometriosis (stage III or IV) or after surgery is well known. There are clear, published recommendations detailing the effectiveness of different options for fertility preservation that could be offered to those patients [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e]. For example, compared to the management of women with oncological pathology, ovarian tissue cortex explantation plays a minor role in cryopreservation for women with endometriosis. This may be due to the perception in some countries that this technique is experimental, although the latest ASRM guidelines now endorse this procedure as an acceptable fertility preservation method [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e]. With more than 200 live births reported, this technique certainly credits a place for fertility preservation [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e]. Of course, medical criteria and individual circumstances will play a role on deciding which procedure is best suited for each patient. Therefore, the decision to preserve fertility in this type of patients deserves clear recommendations.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe results of this survey of 58 European gynaecological surgeons and reproductive medicine specialists show a lack of uniformity in guidelines and practices to preserve fertility in women with endometriosis. Some aspects of endometriosis and fertility already show a good uptake, such as reduction of endometriomas before oocyte pick-up, but the availability of an endoscopic surgeon may be a limiting factor for some fertility centres.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLarge differences in fertility preservation strategies across Europe can be caused by multiple factors such as lack of access to surgery or fertility centres, lack of knowledge, unfamiliarity with procedures, absent or unclear regulations, or confusing guidelines. However, counselling for fertility preservation is becoming more relevant to endometriosis patients to maximise their chances of becoming pregnant and having a healthy baby during their reproductive life. The women\u0026rsquo;s age, stage of the disease, and previous surgical treatments may all result in a compromised ovarian reserve. Even in the absence of surgical intervention, ovarian reserve will still be negatively impacted over time. The intervention of European societies to create awareness and educate women and healthcare professionals is urgently needed, considering incidence, pathology, and surgical consequences of endometriosis.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cp\u003eACOG\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAFC\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Antral follicular count\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAMH\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Anti-M\u0026uuml;llerian hormone\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eART \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Assisted reproductive techniques\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eASRM\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;American Society for Reproductive Medicine\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAWMF\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCNGOF\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Coll\u0026egrave;ge National des Gyn\u0026eacute;cologues et Obst\u0026eacute;tricien Fran\u0026ccedil;ais\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDGGG\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Deutsche Gesellschaft f\u0026uuml;r Gyn\u0026auml;kologie und Geburtshilfe\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eESHRE\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFertiPROTEKT\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Network of fertility preservation centres in German-speaking countries\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFIGO\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;International Federation Of Gynecology And Obstetrics\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFP\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;fertility preservation\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFSH\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Follicle-stimulating hormone\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGnRH\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Gonadotropin-releasing hormone\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIVF\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;In-vitro fertilization\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNICE\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;National Institute for Health and Care\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSEF\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Sociedad Espa\u0026ntilde;ola de Fertilidad\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSIGO\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Italian Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSOGC \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWES \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;World Endometriosis Society.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis was not an interventional study and no new patient data were created or analysed. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMM is employed by the funder of this survey, PregLem S.A., and contributed to the design of the survey and reviewed the manuscript. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe survey platform was funded by PregLem (PregLem SA, Route de Frontenex 41A, 1207 Geneva, Switzerland) [a member of the Gedeon Richter group, Budapest, Hungary] and dispersed through the ORBIS-network across Europe.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors\u0026rsquo; contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eN.S. and J.V. conceived of the presented idea, developed the survey and performed the computations. N.S. and M.M. verified the analytical methods. All authors helped to shape the research, disseminate the survey and contributed to the analysis and interpretation of the results. N.S. took the lead in writing the manuscript and all authors provided critical feedback and contributed to the final manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEditorial support and assistance in the preparation of figures was provided by Joanne Fitz-Gerald and Jonathan A C Lee at FourWave Medical Communications, the funding for which was provided by PregLem S.A./Gedeon Richter.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDonnez J, Dolmans MM. Fertility preservation in women. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1657\u0026ndash;65. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1056/NEJMra1614676\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRienzi L, Gracia C, Maggiulli R, LaBarbera AR, Kaser DJ, Ubaldi FM, Vanderpoel S, Racowsky C. Oocyte, embryo and blastocyst cryopreservation in ART: systematic review and meta-analysis comparing slow-freezing versus vitrification to produce evidence for the development of global guidance. Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23:139\u0026ndash;55. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1093/humupd/dmw038\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCobo A, Garcia-Velasco J, Domingo J, Pellicer A, Remohi J. Elective and onco-fertility preservation: factors related to IVF outcomes. Hum Reprod. 2018;33:2222\u0026ndash;31. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1093/humrep/dey321\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSomigliana E, Vigano P, Filippi F, Papaleo E, Benaglia L, Candiani M, Vercellini P. Fertility preservation in women with endometriosis: for all, for some, for none? Hum Reprod. 2015;30:1280\u0026ndash;6. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1093/humrep/dev078\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHorton J, Sterrenburg M, Lane S, Maheshwari A, Li TC, Cheong Y. Reproductive, obstetric, and perinatal outcomes of women with adenomyosis and endometriosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2019;25:592\u0026ndash;632. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1093/humupd/dmz012\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLlarena NC, Falcone T, Flyckt RL. Fertility preservation in women with endometriosis. Clin Med Insights Reprod Health. 2019;13:1179558119873386. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1177/1179558119873386\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTanbo T, Fedorcsak P. Endometriosis-associated infertility: aspects of pathophysiological mechanisms and treatment options. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017;96:659\u0026ndash;67. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1111/aogs.13082\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMiller CE. The endometrioma treatment paradigm when fertility is desired: a systematic review. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2021;28:575\u0026ndash;86. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.jmig.2020.11.020\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKitajima M, Defr\u0026egrave;re S, Dolmans MM, Colette S, Squifflet J, Van Langendonckt A, Donnez J. Endometriomas as a possible cause of reduced ovarian reserve in women with endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:685\u0026ndash;91. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.06.064\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKitajima M, Dolmans MM, Donnez O, Masuzaki H, Soares M, Donnez J. Enhanced follicular recruitment and atresia in cortex derived from ovaries with endometriomas. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:1031\u0026ndash;7. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.049\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKitajima M, Khan KN, Harada A, Taniguchi K, Inoue T, Kaneuchi M, Miura K, Masuzaki H. Association between ovarian endometrioma and ovarian reserve. Front Biosci (Elite Ed). 2018;10:92\u0026ndash;102. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.2741/e810\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBourdon M, Raad J, Dahan Y, Marcellin L, Maignien C, Even M, Pocate-Cheriet K, Lamau MC, Santulli P, Chapron C. Endometriosis and ART: A prior history of surgery for OMA is associated with a poor ovarian response to hyperstimulation. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0202399. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1371/journal.pone.0202399\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiang Y, Yang X, Lan Y, Lei L, Li Y, Wang S. Effect of endometrioma cystectomy on cytokines of follicular fluid and IVF outcomes. J Ovarian Res. 2019;12:98. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1186/s13048-019-0572-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBiacchiardi CP, Piane LD, Camanni M, Deltetto F, Delpiano EM, Marchino GL, Gennarelli G, Revelli A. Laparoscopic stripping of endometriomas negatively affects ovarian follicular reserve even if performed by experienced surgeons. Reprod Biomed Online. 2011;23:740\u0026ndash;6. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.07.014\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCalagna G, Della Corte L, Giampaolino P, Maranto M, Perino A. Endometriosis and strategies of fertility preservation: a systematic review of the literature. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2020;254:218\u0026ndash;25. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.09.045\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKaradağ C, Yoldemir T, Demircan Karadağ S, Turgut A. The effects of endometrioma size and bilaterality on ovarian reserve. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;40:531\u0026ndash;6. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1080/01443615.2019.1633518\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSomigliana E, Arnoldi M, Benaglia L, Iemmello R, Nicolosi AE, Ragni G. IVF-ICSI outcome in women operated on for bilateral endometriomas. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:1526\u0026ndash;30. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1093/humrep/den133\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCranney R, Condous G, Reid S. An update on the diagnosis, surgical management, and fertility outcomes for women with endometrioma. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017;96:633\u0026ndash;43. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1111/aogs.13114\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCobo A, Diaz C. Clinical application of oocyte vitrification: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:277\u0026ndash;85. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.06.030\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCobo A, Coello A, de Los Santos MJ, Giles J, Pellicer A, Remoh\u0026iacute; J, Garc\u0026iacute;a-Velasco JA. Number needed to freeze: cumulative live birth rate after fertility preservation in women with endometriosis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2021;42:725\u0026ndash;32. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.12.013\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDonnez J, Dolmans MM, Demylle D, Jadoul P, Pirard C, Squifflet J, Martinez-Madrid B, van Langendonckt A. Livebirth after orthotopic transplantation of cryopreserved ovarian tissue. Lancet. 2004;364:1405\u0026ndash;10. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/s0140-6736(04)17222-x\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePractice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). Fertility preservation in patients undergoing gonadotoxic therapy or gonadectomy: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2019;112:1022\u0026ndash;33. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.09.013\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDong Z, An J, Xie X, Wang Z, Sun P. Preoperative serum anti-M\u0026uuml;llerian hormone level is a potential predictor of ovarian endometrioma severity and postoperative fertility. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2019;240:113\u0026ndash;20. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.06.024\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCobo A, Giles J, Paolelli S, Pellicer A, Remoh\u0026iacute; J, Garc\u0026iacute;a-Velasco JA. Oocyte vitrification for fertility preservation in women with endometriosis: an observational study. Fertil Steril. 2020;113:836\u0026ndash;44. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.11.017\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCobo A, Garc\u0026iacute;a-Velasco JA, Remoh\u0026iacute; J, Pellicer A. Oocyte vitrification for fertility preservation for both medical and nonmedical reasons. Fertil Steril. 2021;115:1091\u0026ndash;101. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.02.006\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLessey BA, Gordts S, Donnez O, Somigliana E, Chapron C, Garcia-Velasco JA, Donnez J. Ovarian endometriosis and infertility: in vitro fertilization (IVF) or surgery as the first approach? Fertil Steril. 2018;110:1218\u0026ndash;26. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.10.003\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHirsch M, Begum MR, Paniz \u0026Eacute;, Barker C, Davis CJ, Duffy J. Diagnosis and management of endometriosis: a systematic review of international and national guidelines. BJOG. 2018;125:556\u0026ndash;64. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1111/1471-0528.14838\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKuroda K, Ikemoto Y, Ochiai A, Ozaki R, Matsumura Y, Nojiri S, Nakagawa K, Sugiyama R. Combination treatment of preoperative embryo cryopreservation and endoscopic surgery (surgery-ART hybrid therapy) in infertile women with diminished ovarian reserve and uterine myomas or ovarian endometriomas. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2019;26:1369\u0026ndash;75. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.jmig.2019.02.008\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDadoun Y, Aza\u0026iuml;s H, Keller L, d'Orazio E, Collinet P, Decanter C. [Systematic proposal of fertility preservation by mature oocyte cryopreservation for recurrent benign ovarian tumors]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2017;45:359\u0026ndash;65. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.gofs.2017.03.005\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDecanter C, d'Argent EM, Boujenah J, Poncelet C, Chauffour C, Collinet P, Santulli P. [Endometriosis and fertility preservation: CNGOF-HAS Endometriosis Guidelines]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2018;46:368\u0026ndash;72. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.gofs.2018.02.010\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHaydardedeoglu B, Zeyneloglu HB. The impact of endometriosis on fertility. Womens Health (Lond). 2015;11:619\u0026ndash;23. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.2217/whe.15.48\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBj\u0026ouml;rk E, Gustavsson M, Palmstierna M, Valentin A, Olovsson M, Melin AS [Endometriosis - new clinical guidelines for better and equal care in Sweden]. \u003cem\u003eLakartidningen\u003c/em\u003e 2020, \u003cem\u003e117\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNnoaham KE, Hummelshoj L, Webster P, d'Hooghe T, de Cicco Nardone F, de Cicco Nardone C, Jenkinson C, Kennedy SH, Zondervan KT. Impact of endometriosis on quality of life and work productivity: a multicenter study across ten countries. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:366\u0026ndash;73.e368. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.05.090\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEvans MB, Decherney AH. Fertility and endometriosis. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;60:497\u0026ndash;502. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1097/grf.0000000000000295\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLebovic DI, Mueller MD, Taylor RN. Immunobiology of endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2001;75:1\u0026ndash;10. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/s0015-0282(00)01630-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKao LC, Germeyer A, Tulac S, Lobo S, Yang JP, Taylor RN, Osteen K, Lessey BA, Giudice LC. Expression profiling of endometrium from women with endometriosis reveals candidate genes for disease-based implantation failure and infertility. Endocrinology. 2003;144:2870\u0026ndash;81. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1210/en.2003-0043\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMarie-Madeleine D, Camille H, Luciana C, Glenn S. Summary of the ISFP congress, New York, 14-16 November, 2019. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020;37:983\u0026ndash;5. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1007/s10815-020-01757-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAmerican College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Practice bulletin no. 114: management of endometriosis. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116:223\u0026ndash;36. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181e8b073\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLeyland N, Casper R, Laberge P, Singh SS. Endometriosis: diagnosis and management. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2010;32:1\u0026ndash;32.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDunselman GA, Vermeulen N, Becker C, Calhaz-Jorge C, D'Hooghe T, De Bie B, Heikinheimo O, Horne AW, Kiesel L, Nap A, et al. ESHRE guideline: management of women with endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:400\u0026ndash;12. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1093/humrep/det457\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAnderson RA, Amant F, Braat D, D'Angelo A, Chuva deS, Lopes SM, Demeestere I, Dwek S, Frith L, Lambertini M, Maslin C, et al. ESHRE guideline: female fertility preservation. \u003cem\u003eHum Reprod Open\u003c/em\u003e 2020, \u003cem\u003e2020\u003c/em\u003e, hoaa052, doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1093/hropen/hoaa052\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAdamson GD, Endometriosis. Medical and Surgical Management of Pain and Infertility. Available online: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.figo.org/sites/default/files/2020-07/Endometriosis%20Slides%202016%20-%20Rep%20Med.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (accessed on 5 March 2021).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnson NP, Hummelshoj L, Adamson GD, Keckstein J, Taylor HS, Abrao MS, Bush D, Kiesel L, Tamimi R, Sharpe-Timms KL, et al. World Endometriosis Society consensus on the classification of endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2017;32:315\u0026ndash;24. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1093/humrep/dew293\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCollinet P, Fritel X, Revel-Delhom C, Ballester M, Bolze PA, Borghese B, Bornsztein N, Boujenah J, Brillac T, Chabbert-Buffet N, et al. Management of endometriosis: CNGOF/HAS clinical practice guidelines - Short version. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2018;47:265\u0026ndash;74. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.jogoh.2018.06.003\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAWMF Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften. Leitlinie Diagnostik und Therapie der Endometriose [German guideline for diagnosis and management of endometriosis]. Available online: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/awmf-regelwerk\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (accessed on 5 March 2021).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAWMF Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften. Leitlinie Fertilit\u0026auml;tserhalt [German guideline for fertility preservation]. Available online: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/awmf-regelwerk\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (accessed on 5 March 2021).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003evon Wolff M, Nawroth F \u003cem\u003eFertility Preservation in Oncological and Non-Oncological Diseases: A Practical Guide\u003c/em\u003e, 1st ed.; Springer: 2020.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSIGO Societ\u0026agrave; Italiana di Ginecologia e Obstetrica. Diagnosi e Trattamento dell'Endometriosi [Diagnosis and Treatment of Endometriosis]. June 2018. Available online: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.aogoi.it/media/5066/lg_diagnositrattamentoendometriosi-2018.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (accessed on 5 March 2021).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSEF Sociedad Espa\u0026ntilde;ola de Fertilidad. Manejo de la paciente con endometriosis durante la edad f\u0026eacute;rtil [Management of endometriosis in women of childbearing age]. Available online: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.sefertilidad.net/docs/biblioteca/manejoEndometriosis.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (accessed on 5 March 2021).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNICE. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Endometriosis: diagnosis and management. NICE guideline (NG73). Available online: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng73/resources/endometriosis-diagnosis-and-management-pdf-1837632548293\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/NG73\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (accessed on 5 March 2020).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCosma S, Benedetto C. Classification algorithm of patients with endometriosis: proposal for tailored management. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2020;29:615\u0026ndash;22. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.17219/acem/118849\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKho RM, Andres MP, Borrelli GM, Neto JS, Zanluchi A, Abr\u0026atilde;o MS. Surgical treatment of different types of endometriosis: Comparison of major society guidelines and preferred clinical algorithms. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;51:102\u0026ndash;10. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2018.01.020\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDolmans MM, Donnez J. Fertility preservation in women for medical and social reasons: Oocytes vs ovarian tissue. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2021;70:63\u0026ndash;80. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2020.06.011\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDolmans MM, Manavella DD. Recent advances in fertility preservation. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2019;45:266\u0026ndash;79. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1111/jog.13818\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCobo A, Garc\u0026iacute;a-Velasco JA, Coello A, Domingo J, Pellicer A, Remoh\u0026iacute; J. Oocyte vitrification as an efficient option for elective fertility preservation. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:755\u0026ndash;64.e758. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.11.027\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMartinez F. Update on fertility preservation from the Barcelona International Society for Fertility Preservation-ESHRE-ASRM 2015 expert meeting: indications, results and future perspectives. Hum Reprod. 2017;32:1802\u0026ndash;11. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1093/humrep/dex218\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarnett R, Banks N, Decherney AH. Endometriosis and fertility preservation. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;60:517\u0026ndash;23. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1097/grf.0000000000000311\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"endometriosis, endometrioma, surgery, assisted reproductive technology (ART), ovarian reserve, female infertility, fertility preservation, cryopreservation, oocyte, ovarian tissue","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-966804/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-966804/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eBackground\u003c/em\u003e:\u003c/strong\u003e Endometriosis is a common cause for infertility. Decreased ovarian reserve due to pathology or surgical management can reduce the chances of natural pregnancy and limit the effectiveness of controlled ovarian stimulation during fertility treatment. Cryopreservation of oocytes or ovarian cortex prior to surgery or before loss of follicular capital are strategies to preserve fecundity. \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eMethods\u003c/em\u003e: \u003c/strong\u003eAn online survey was sent to reproductive specialists and gynaecological surgeons representing major centers of reproductive medicine in Europe to investigate current fertility preservation practices for endometriosis patients. \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eResults\u003c/em\u003e: \u003c/strong\u003eOf 58 responses, 45 (77.6%) in 11/13 countries reported the existence of endometriosis management guidelines, of which 37/45 (82.2%) included treatment recommendations for infertile patients. Most centers (51.7%) reserved fertility counselling for severe endometriosis (large endometriomas with or without deep endometriosis) while 15.5% of centers did not offer fertility preservation for endometriosis. \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eConclusions\u003c/em\u003e: \u003c/strong\u003eTo address non-uniformity in available guidelines and the diversity in fertility preservation practices, we propose an algorithm for managing patients with severe endometriosis most likely to be impacted by reduced ovarian reserve. Improved awareness about the possibilities of fertility preservation and clear communication between gynaecological surgeons and reproductive medicine specialists is mandatory to address the unmet clinical need of preventing infertility in women with endometriosis.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Fertility Preservation Counselling for Women With Endometriosis: A European Online Survey","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2021-10-27 15:25:55","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-966804/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"22876f43-2dfc-4e68-9985-228260baff63","owner":[],"postedDate":"October 27th, 2021","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":8147065,"name":"Sexual \u0026 Reproductive Medicine"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2021-10-27T15:25:57+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2021-10-27 15:25:55","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-966804","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-966804","identity":"rs-966804","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"B-jG_2CBjPDmsCi4Wdhf-","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}