Table 6.

Technology maturity of potential experimental fertility preservation approach for transgender men

Patient population	Method	Technique	GAHT cessation*	Results	References
Cisgender	ALT	Tissue-based	Yes
Adult tissue				Live births	Reviewed in Gellert et al. (2018), Donnez & Dolmans (2017), Khattak et al. (2022)
Cisgender prepubertal and adolescent tissue				Live births	Demeestere et al. (2015), Matthews et al. (2018), Rodriguez-Wallberg et al. (2021b)
Transgender				No data	No data
Cisgender	OTO/IVM	Cell-based	No
Patients with cancer or ovarian neoplasm				Live births	Segers et al. (2020)
				Live birth†	Kedem et al. (2018), Uzelac et al. (2015), Prasath et al. (2014)
				50-76.9% fertilization rate; Pregnancy rate not reported due to no utilization	Reviewed in Mohd Faizal et al. (2022)
				Successful oocyte aspiration during cesarean section	Hwang et al. (1997)
Benign pelvic AVM				Pregnancy	Segers et al. (2015)
TGD with ovaries
Adult				Normal spindle after thawing	Lierman et al. (2017)
				Poor embryonic progression after fertilization	Lierman et al. (2021)
				Poor embryonic progression overcome by spindle transfer	Christodoulaki et al. (2023)

ALT, autologous transplantation; AVM, arteriovenous malformation; TGD, transgender and gender diverse individuals; OTO/IVM,ovarian tissue oocyte/in vitro maturation.

*GAHT cessation at the time of fertility restoration; †Live birth rate after embryo transfer = 43%