PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “INSEMINATION, ARTIFICIAL”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 145 records · Page 8Linked to original sources
PubMed1981

Artificial insemination by frozen donor semen: results of multicentre Australian experience.

A total of 5461 insemination cycles with frozen donor semen has been analysed for 8 of the larger AID services in Australia. Cumulative pregnancy rate, calculated by life-table analysis, showed that 50% of all patients are pregnant after 6 cycles of insemination and 64% of all patients are pregnant after 12 cycles of insemination. Pregnancy rate was significantly higher in the first 3 cycles, declined in the next 3 cycles and was further reduced in the last 6 cycles of insemination. An average of 10% of all insemination cycle were anovular, but the proportion of anovular cycles was significantly lower in the first 2 cycles of insemination. There was no significant difference in cumulative pregnancy rates over the first 6 cycles of insemination in clinics using cervical mucus scoring or LH assay for detection of ovulation. An average of 12% of all pregnancies obtained by AID resulted in miscarriage.

Australia↗
PubMed1986

Methods for improvement of the success rate of artificial insemination with donor semen.

The cumulative probability of conception within 12 cycles of insemination with frozen-thawed donor semen increased from 59 to 70% by selecting the semen on the basis of its concentration of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) rather than on the basis of its motile sperm count. The success rate further improved to 83% by performing induction of ovulation in all recipients who did not achieve pregnancy within the initial 6 cycles.

Actuarial Analysis↗
PubMed1986

Genetic screening for artificial insemination by donor (AID). Results of a study on 676 semen donors.

We report the results of our ten-year experience in the Centre for Study and Conservation of Human Semen (CECOS) in Paris-Bicêtre. A total of 676 potential semen donors were interviewed by a geneticist and karyotyped; 6.0% were excluded, i.e. 2.6% for a cytogenetic reason and 3.4% for a genic reason. Our experience stresses the subjectivity and difficulty of the exclusion decision. It also shows how useful it is to take into account the recipient's familial pathology when choosing the donor. Finally, it reveals the importance of the geneticist's participation in the functioning of a centre.

Chromosome Aberrations↗