Fertility Preservation in the Transgender Population

Hormonal and surgical treatments for transgender individuals can severely impact reproductive potential. In this review, we discuss the role of fertility preservation in both male-to-female and female-to-male transgender patients. We focus on the effects of hormone replacement therapy on the gonads and discuss current methods and techniques available for fertility preservation. Moreover, we review the current literature on patient attitudes toward fertility preservation and existing barriers to care.

The literature supports the notion that feminizing therapy negatively impacts spermatogenesis, as evidenced by impaired semen parameters. The degree of such decline lies on a spectrum and can be somewhat unpredictable. Similarly, masculinizing therapy with testosterone has variable effects on ovarian function, gynecologic organs, and future fertility potential. Further research is required to better elucidate the long-term effects of such therapies. Optimal timing for fertility preservation is in the postpubertal period prior to initiation of hormonal therapy. This is however not always possible. A multitude of barriers to pursuing fertility preservation exist, including lack of appropriate counseling, the potentially invasive nature of some fertility preservation methods, and the financial burden placed on the patients.

Fertility preservation in the transgender population remains poorly utilized. For transgender women, cryopreservation of sperm ideally is performed prior to initiation of hormone replacement therapy. Nonetheless, studies have shown that a degree of spermatogenesis is seen in some individuals without discontinuation of hormonal therapy. This could allow for less disruption, both physically and emotionally. Fertility preservation in transgender men remains invasive with oocyte retrieval as the main technique. Cessation of therapy, ovarian stimulation, and invasive testing has potential to be traumatic and enhance dysphoria. The possibility of fertility preservation at the time of gonadectomy is promising. Prepubertal fertility preservation is also on the horizon, though still experimental. Cost of preservation techniques and storage is currently prohibitive for many patients. Recent changes to state insurance mandates may soon make fertility preservation more accessible. Future research may demonstrate that fertility preservation is possible at the time of gender confirmation surgery, with the goal of being both effective and nontraumatic to the patient.