Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Grenzüberschreitung in der reproduktiven Medizin

Eizellspende im Ausland

Crossing borders in reproductive medicine

Foreign oocyte donation

  • Gynäkologie aktuell
  • Published:
Der Gynäkologe Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Die Eizellspende als ein in der Reproduktionsmedizin angewandtes Verfahren ist in Deutschland nach dem Embryonenschutzgesetz (ESchG) verboten. Daher nutzen Paare mit unerfülltem Kinderwunsch Institutionen im europäischen Ausland. Die weitere Betreuung der Schwangerschaft durch den behandelnden Gynäkologen in Deutschland erfolgt oft ohne Kenntnis über den Entstehungsweg. Die Eizellspende birgt jedoch das Risiko hypertensiver Schwangerschaftserkrankungen, daher sollten so behandelte Frauen einer intensiven Schwangerschaftsüberwachung zugeführt werden. Im Beitrag wird über eine 41-jährige Patientin berichtet, die eine Eizellspende im Ausland durchführen ließ. In der 24 + 0 SSW erfolgte die Zuweisung an unsere Klinik 2011 bei manifester Präeklampsie. Die Schwangerschaft wurde in der 28. SSW aus mütterlicher Indikation beendet. Vor dem Hintergrund der im Detail geschilderten Kasuistik werden historische, ethische und rechtliche Aspekte sowie das Risiko der Präeklampsie nach Eizellspende diskutiert.

Abstract

Pregnancy risks after ovum donation (OD) to patients with ovarian failure or idiopathic low ovarian response are still under debate. As OD is prohibited in Germany by the embryo protection act couples wanting children contact in vitro fertilization (IVF) centres abroad sometimes without adequate information. The fear of stigmatization and uncertainties about the legal situation may lead patients to conceal the treatment abroad from their local physician. There is increasing evidence that OD is associated with pregnancy-induced hypertension. We here report on a 41-year-old patient who was admitted to this hospital in 2011 in the 24 0/7 week of gestation with manifest preeclampsia. As the patients condition worsened pregnancy was terminated in the 28th week of gestation. The historical, ethical and legal aspects as well as the risks of preeclampsia after OD are discussed. Gynecologists should be aware of the risk of preeclampsia after OD and pregnancies have to be carefully observed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  1. Ferraretti AP, Pennings G, Gianaroli L et al (2010) Cross-border reproductive care: a phenomenon expressing the controversial aspects of reproductive technologies. Reprod Biomed Online 20:261–266

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Stobel-Richter Y, Goldschmidt S, Brahler E et al (2009) Egg donation, surrogate mothering, and cloning: attitudes of men and women in Germany based on a representative survey. Fertil Steril 92:124–130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Pecks U, Maass N, Neulen J (2011) Oocyte donation: a risk factor for pregnancy-induced hypertension: a meta-analysis and case series. Dtsch Arztebl Int 108:23–31

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bustillo M, Buster JE, Cohen SW et al (1984) Delivery of a healthy infant following nonsurgical ovum transfer. JAMA 251:889

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Trounson A, Leeton J, Besanko M et al (1983) Pregnancy established in an infertile patient after transfer of a donated embryo fertilised in vitro. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 286:835–838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Lutjen P, Trounson A, Leeton J et al (1984) The establishment and maintenance of pregnancy using in vitro fertilization and embryo donation in a patient with primary ovarian failure. Nature 307:174–175

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Pantos K, Meimeti-Damianaki T, Vaxevanoglou T, Kapetanakis E (1993) Oocyte donation in menopausal women aged over 40 years. Hum Reprod 8:488–491

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Sauer MV, Paulson RJ, Lobo RA (1990) A preliminary report on oocyte donation extending reproductive potential to women over 40. N Engl J Med 323:1157–1160

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Sauer MV, Paulson RJ, Lobo RA (1992) Reversing the natural decline in human fertility. An extended clinical trial of oocyte donation to women of advanced reproductive age. JAMA 268:1275–1279

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Antinori S, Versaci C, Gholami GH et al (1993) Oocyte donation in menopausal women. Hum Reprod 8:1487–1490

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Sauer MV, Paulson RJ, Lobo RA (1993) Pregnancy after age 50: application of oocyte donation to women after natural menopause. Lancet 341:321–323

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Serhal PF, Craft IL (1989) Oocyte donation in 61 patients. Lancet 1:1185–1187

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Krieg SA, Henne MB, Westphal LM (2008) Obstetric outcomes in donor oocyte pregnancies compared with advanced maternal age in in vitro fertilization pregnancies. Fertil Steril 90:65–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Keegan DA, Krey LC, Chang HC, Noyes N (2007) Increased risk of pregnancy-induced hypertension in young recipients of donated oocytes. Fertil Steril 87:776–781

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Soderstrom-Anttila V, Tiitinen A, Foudila T, Hovatta O (1998) Obstetric and perinatal outcome after oocyte donation: comparison with in-vitro fertilization pregnancies. Hum Reprod 13:483–490

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Steiner AZ, Paulson RJ (2006) Oocyte donation. Clin Obstet Gynecol 49:44–54

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ethics Committee of the ASRM (2004) Oocyte donation to postmenopausal women. Fertil Steril 82(Suppl 1):254–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Frommel M, Taupitz J, Ochsner A, Geisthövel F (2010) Rechtslage der Reproduktionsmedizin in Deutschland. J Reproduktionsmed Endokrinol 7:96–105

    Google Scholar 

  19. Taupitz J, Schlüter J (2005) Heterologe künstliche Befruchtung: Die Absicherung des Samenspenders gegen unterhalts- und erbrechtliche Ansprüche des Kindes. Arch Civilist Praxis 205:591–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mancini F, Clua E, Martinez F et al (2011) Heterotopic pregnancy in a cross border oocyte donation patient: the importance of cooperation between centers. Fertil Steril 95(7):2432 e13–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt für sich und seine Koautoren an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Frauenklinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum der RWTH, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52074, Aachen, Deutschland

    U. Pecks & N. Maass

  2. Frauenklinik für Gynäkologische Endokrinologie und Reproduktionsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum der RWTH, Aachen, Deutschland

    J. Neulen

Authors
  1. U. Pecks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. N. Maass
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Neulen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to U. Pecks.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pecks, U., Maass, N. & Neulen, J. Grenzüberschreitung in der reproduktiven Medizin. Gynäkologe 45, 476–482 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-012-2977-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-012-2977-x

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation