Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Acta Obstetricia et ...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
Article . 2020 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Live birth after robotic‐assisted live donor uterus transplantation

Authors: Mats Brännström; Pernilla Dahm‐Kähler; Niclas Kvarnström; Randa Akouri; Karin Rova; Michael Olausson; Klaus Groth; +5 Authors

Live birth after robotic‐assisted live donor uterus transplantation

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionThe proof‐of‐concept of uterus transplantation, as a treatment for absolute uterine factor infertility, came with the first live birth after uterus transplantation, which took place in Sweden in 2014. This was after a live donor procedure, with laparotomy in both donor and recipient. In our second, ongoing trial we introduced a robotic‐assisted laparoscopic surgery of the donor to develop minimal invasive surgery for this procedure. Here, we report the surgery and pregnancy behind the first live birth from that trial.Material and methodsIn the present study, within a prospective observational study, a 62‐year‐old mother was the uterus donor and her 33‐year‐old daughter with uterine absence as part of the Mayer‐Rokitansky‐Küster‐Hauser syndrome, was the recipient. Donor surgery was mainly done by robotic‐assisted laparoscopy, involving dissections of the utero‐vaginal fossa, arteries and ureters. The last part of surgery was by laparotomy. Recipient laparotomy included vascular anastomoses to the external iliac vessels. Data relating to in vitro fertilization, surgery, follow up, obstetrics and postnatal growth are presented.ResultsThree in vitro fertilization cycles prior to transplantation gave 12 cryopreserved embryos. The surgical time of the donor in the robot was 360 minutes, according to protocol. The durations for robotic surgery for dissections of the utero‐vaginal fossa, arteries and ureters were 30, 160 and 84 minutes, respectively. The remainder of donor surgery was by laparotomy. Recipient surgery included preparations of the vaginal vault, three end‐to‐side anastomoses (one arterial, two venous) on each side to the external iliacs and fixation of the uterus. Ten months after transplantation, one blastocyst was transferred and resulted in pregnancy, which proceeded uneventfully until elective cesarean section in week 36+1. A healthy boy (Apgar 9‐10‐10) was delivered. Follow up of child has been uneventful for 12 months.ConclusionsThis is the first report of a live birth after use of robotic‐assisted laparoscopy in uterus transplantation and is thereby a proof‐of‐concept of use of minimal invasive surgery in this new type of transplantation.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Adult, Male, Uterus, Infant, Newborn, Fertilization in Vitro, Organ Transplantation, Middle Aged, Robotic Surgical Procedures, Pregnancy, Living Donors, Humans, Female, Laparoscopy, Prospective Studies, Live Birth

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    60
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
60
Top 1%
Top 10%
Top 1%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!