Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 7/2018

01-07-2018 | Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Cross border reproductive care (CBRC): a growing global phenomenon with multidimensional implications (a systematic and critical review)

Authors: Mahmoud Salama, Vladimir Isachenko, Evgenia Isachenko, Gohar Rahimi, Peter Mallmann, Lynn M. Westphal, Marcia C. Inhorn, Pasquale Patrizio

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 7/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Many people travel abroad to access fertility treatments. This growing phenomenon is known as cross border reproductive care (CBRC) or fertility tourism. Due to its complex nature and implications worldwide, CBRC has become an emerging dilemma deserving more attention on the global healthcare agenda.

Methods

According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic review of the literature was performed for all relevant full-text articles published in PubMed in English during the past 18 years to explore CBRC phenomenon in the new millennium.

Results

Little is known about the accurate magnitude and scope of CBRC around the globe. In this systematic and critical review, we identify three major dimensions of CBRC: legal, economic, and ethical. We analyze each of these dimensions from clinical and practical perspectives.

Conclusion

CBRC is a growing reality worldwide with potential benefits and risks. Therefore, it is very crucial to regulate the global market of CBRC on legal, economic, and ethical bases in order to increase harmonization and reduce any forms of exploitation. Establishment of accurate international statistics and a global registry will help diminish the current information gap surrounding the CBRC phenomenon.
Literature
1.
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Cross-border reproductive care: an ethics committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2016;106(7):1627–33.CrossRef
2.
Pennings G, de Wert G, Shenfield F, Cohen J, Tarlatzis B, Devroey P. ESHRE task force on ethics and law 15: cross-border reproductive care. Hum Reprod. 2008;23(10):2182–4.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Shenfield F, Pennings G, De Mouzon J, Ferraretti AP, Goossens V, ESHRE Task Force ‘Cross Border Reproductive Care’ (CBRC). ESHRE’s good practice guide for cross-border reproductive care for centers and practitioners. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(7):1625–7.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Gürtin ZB, Inhorn MC. Introduction: travelling for conception and the global assisted reproduction market. Reprod BioMed Online. 2011;23(5):535–7.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Inhorn MC, Patrizio P. Rethinking reproductive “tourism” as reproductive “exile”. Fertil Steril. 2009;92(3):904–6.PubMedCrossRef
6.
7.
Salama M. Cross border reproductive care (CBRC): a global perspective. Obstet Gynecol Int J. 2014;1(2):00008.CrossRef
8.
Inhorn MC, Patrizio P. Infertility around the globe: new thinking on gender, reproductive technologies and global movements in the 21st century. Hum Reprod Update. 2015;21(4):411–26.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Couture V, Drouin R, Tan SL, Moutquin JM, Bouffard C. Cross-border reprogenetic services. Clin Genet. 2015;87(1):1–10.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Ethics Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Cross-border reproductive care: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(3):645–50.CrossRef
11.
Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):e1–e34.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Storrow RF. Assisted reproduction on treacherous terrain: the legal hazards of cross-border reproductive travel. Reprod BioMed Online. 2011;23(5):538–45.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Van Hoof W, Pennings G. Extraterritorial laws for cross-border reproductive care: the issue of legal diversity. Eur J Health Law. 2012;19(2):187–200.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Crockin SL. Legal perspectives on cross-border reproductive care. Reprod BioMed Online. 2011;23(7):811–3.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Pennings G. Legal harmonization and reproductive tourism in Europe. Hum Reprod. 2004;19(12):2689–94.PubMedCrossRef
16.
17.
Millbank J. Responsive regulation of cross-border assisted reproduction. J Law Med. 2015;23(2):346–64.PubMed
18.
Flatscher-Thöni M, Voithofer C. Should reproductive medicine be harmonized within Europe? Eur J Health Law. 2015;22(1):61–74.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Van Hoof W, Pennings G, De Sutter P. Cross-border reproductive care for law evasion: should physicians be allowed to help infertility patients evade the law of their own country? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;202:101–5.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Harper J, Geraedts J, Borry P, Cornel MC, Dondorp WJ, Gianaroli L, et al. ESHG, ESHRE and EuroGentest2. Current issues in medically assisted reproduction and genetics in Europe: research, clinical practice, ethics, legal issues and policy. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(8):1603–9.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Harper JC, Geraedts J, Borry P, Cornel MC, Dondorp W, Gianaroli L, et al. Current issues in medically assisted reproduction and genetics in Europe: research, clinical practice, ethics, legal issues and policy. Eur J Hum Genet. 2013;21(Suppl 2):S1–21.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
Crockin SL. Growing families in a shrinking world: legal and ethical challenges in cross-border surrogacy. Reprod BioMed Online. 2013;27(6):733–41.PubMedCrossRef
23.
International Federation of Fertility Societies. IFFS Surveillance 2016. Glob Reprod Health. 2016;1:1–143.
24.
25.
26.
Forman R. Cross-border reproductive care: a clinician’s perspective. Reprod BioMed Online. 2011;23(7):808–10.PubMedCrossRef
27.
28.
Blyth E. Fertility patients’ experiences of cross-border reproductive care. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(1):e11–5.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Whittaker A, Speier A. “Cycling overseas”: care, commodification, and stratification in cross-border reproductive travel. Med Anthropol. 2010;29(4):363–83.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Messinis IE, Messini CI, Daponte A, Garas A, Mahmood T. The current situation of infertility services provision in Europe. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016.
31.
Hertz R, Nelson MK, Suñol J. Attitudes toward regulations of reproductive care in the European Union: a comparison between travellers for cross-border reproductive care and citizens of the local country. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2016;8(3):147–60.PubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Hughes EG, Sawyer A, DeJean D, Adamson GD. Cross-border reproductive care in North America: a pilot study testing a prospective data collection program for in vitro fertilization clinics in Canada and the United States. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(3):786–90.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Levine AD, Boulet SL, Berry RM, Jamieson DJ, Alberta-Sherer HB, Kissin DM. Assessing the use of assisted reproductive technology in the United States by non-United States residents. Fertil Steril. 2017;108(5):815–21.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Rodino IS, Goedeke S, Nowoweiski S. Motivations and experiences of patients seeking cross-border reproductive care: the Australian and New Zealand context. Fertil Steril. 2014;102(5):1422–31.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Hibino Y, Shimazono Y, Kambayashi Y, Hitomi Y, Nakamura H. Attitudes towards cross-border reproductive care among infertile Japanese patients. Environ Health Prev Med. 2013;18(6):477–84.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
36.
Inhorn MC, Shrivastav P, Patrizio P. Assisted reproductive technologies and fertility “tourism”: examples from global Dubai and the Ivy League. Med Anthropol. 2012;31(3):249–65.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Shenfield F, de Mouzon J, Pennings G, et al. Cross border reproductive care in six European countries. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(6):1361–8.PubMedCrossRef
38.
European IVF-monitoring Consortium (EIM); European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), Calhaz-Jorge C, De Geyter C, Kupka MS, de Mouzon J, Erb K, et al. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2013: results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod. 2017;32(10):1957–73.CrossRef
39.
Hudson N, Culley L, Blyth E, Norton W, Pacey A, Rapport F. Cross-border-assisted reproduction: a qualitative account of UK travellers’ experiences. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2016;19(2):102–10.CrossRef
40.
Hudson N, Culley L. Assisted reproductive travel: UK patient trajectories. Reprod BioMed Online. 2011;23(5):573–81.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Van Hoof W, De Sutter P, Pennings G. “Now we feel like we did everything we could”: a qualitative study into the experiences of Dutch patients who travelled to Belgium for infertility treatment. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2014;6(4):185–93.PubMedPubMedCentral
42.
Van Hoof W, Pennings G, De Sutter P. Cross-border reproductive care for law evasion: a qualitative study into the experiences and moral perspectives of French women who go to Belgium for treatment with donor sperm. Soc Sci Med. 2015;124:391–7.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Bassan S, Michaelsen MA. Honeymoon, medical treatment or big business? An analysis of the meanings of the term “reproductive tourism” in German and Israeli public media discourses. Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2013;8:9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
44.
Hunt J. Cross border treatment for infertility: the counselling perspective in the UK. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2013;16(1):64–7.CrossRef
45.
Hamilton M. Sperm donation in the United Kingdom in 2010. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2010;13(4):257–62.CrossRef
46.
Flower D. Assisted reproduction: should egg and sperm donors be paid? J Fam Health Care. 2010;20(2):69–71.PubMed
47.
Bay B, Larsen PB, Kesmodel US, Ingerslev HJ. Danish sperm donors across three decades: motivations and attitudes. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(1):252–257.e1.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Bergmann S. Reproductive agency and projects: Germans searching for egg donation in Spain and the Czech Republic. Reprod BioMed Online. 2011;23(5):600–8.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Madero S, Gameiro S, García D, Cirera D, Vassena R, Rodríguez A. Quality of life, anxiety and depression of German, Italian and French couples undergoing cross-border oocyte donation in Spain. Hum Reprod. 2017;32(9):1862–70.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Pennings G, de Mouzon J, Shenfield F, Ferraretti AP, Mardesic T, Ruiz A, et al. Socio-demographic and fertility-related characteristics and motivations of oocyte donors in eleven European countries. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(5):1076–89.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Defining embryo donation: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2016;106(1):56–8.CrossRef
52.
53.
Pande A. Transnational commercial surrogacy in India: gifts for global sisters? Reprod BioMed Online. 2011;23(5):618–25.PubMedCrossRef
54.
55.
Covington SN, Patrizio P. Gestational carriers and surrogacy. In: Sauer M, editor. Principles of oocyte and embryo donation. 2nd ed. London: Springer Verlag; 2013. p. 277–88.CrossRef
56.
Svitnev K. Legal regulation of assisted reproduction treatment in Russia. Reprod BioMed Online. 2010;20(7):892–4.PubMedCrossRef
57.
58.
Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Fertility preservation in patients undergoing gonadotoxic therapy or gonadectomy: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(5):1214–23.CrossRef
59.
60.
Salama M, Winkler K, Murach KF, Seeber B, Ziehr SC, Wildt L. Female fertility loss and preservation: threats and opportunities. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(3):598–608.PubMedCrossRef
61.
62.
ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law, Dondorp W, de Wert G, Pennings G, Shenfield F, Devroey P, et al. Oocyte cryopreservation for age-related fertility loss. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(5):1231–7.CrossRef
63.
Rebar RW. Social and ethical implications of fertility preservation. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(6):1449–51.PubMedCrossRef
64.
Bower B, Quinn GP. Fertility preservation in cancer patients: ethical considerations. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2012;732:187–96.PubMedCrossRef
65.
Garceau L, Henderson J, Davis LJ, Petrou S, Henderson LR, McVeigh E, et al. Economic implications of assisted reproductive techniques: a systematic review. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(12):3090–109.PubMedCrossRef
66.
Collins J. An international survey of the health economics of IVF and ICSI. Hum Reprod Update. 2002;8(3):265–77.PubMedCrossRef
67.
Connolly MP, Ledger W, Postma MJ. Economics of assisted reproduction: access to fertility treatments and valuing live births in economic terms. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2010;13(1):13–8.CrossRef
68.
Chambers GM, Sullivan E. a, Ishihara O et al. The economic impact of assisted reproductive technology: a review of selected developed countries. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(6):2281–94.PubMedCrossRef
69.
Connolly MP, Hoorens S, Chambers GM. The costs and consequences of assisted reproductive technology: an economic perspective. Hum Reprod Update. 2010;16(6):603–13.PubMedCrossRef
70.
Connolly M. Cross-border reproductive care: market forces in action or market failure? An economic perspective. Reprod BioMed Online. 2011;23(7):817–9.PubMedCrossRef
71.
McKelvey A, David AL, Shenfield F, Jauniaux ER. The impact of cross-border reproductive care or ‘fertility tourism’ on NHS maternity services. BJOG. 2009;116(11):1520–3.PubMedCrossRef
72.
Austin CR. Legal, ethical and historical aspects of assisted human reproduction. Int J Dev Biol. 1997;41(2):263–5.PubMed
73.
74.
75.
Frydman PR. Human reproduction: possibilities and ethical borders. Folia Histochem Cytobiol. 2009;47(5):S5–7.PubMed
76.
Baši M, Milojevi M, Miti D, Cvetkovi J. Ethical aspects in the area of assisted reproduction 2010; 27(3):171–178.
77.
Inhorn MC. Cosmopolitan conceptions: IVF sojourns in Global Dubai. Durham: Duke University Press; 2015.CrossRef
78.
Ferraretti AP, Pennings G, Gianaroli L, Natali F, Magli MC. Cross-border reproductive care: a phenomenon expressing the controversial aspects of reproductive technologies. Reprod BioMed Online. 2010;20(2):261–6.PubMedCrossRef
79.
Crozier GKD, Martin D. How to address the ethics of reproductive travel to developing countries: a comparison of national self-sufficiency and regulated market approaches. Dev World Bioeth. 2012;12(1):45–54.PubMedCrossRef
80.
Deonandan R, Green S, van Beinum A. Ethical concerns for maternal surrogacy and reproductive tourism. J Med Ethics. 2012;38(12):742–5.PubMedCrossRef
81.
Blyth E, Thorn P, Wischmann T. CBRC and psychosocial counselling: assessing needs and developing an ethical framework for practice. Reprod BioMed Online. 2011;23(5):642–51.PubMedCrossRef
82.
Shalev C, Moreno A, Eyal H, Leibel M, Schuz R, Eldar-Geva T. Ethics and regulation of inter-country medically assisted reproduction: a call for action. Isr J Health Policy Res. 2016;5:59. eCollection 2016PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
83.
Deonandan R. Recent trends in reproductive tourism and international surrogacy: ethical considerations and challenges for policy. Risk Manag Health Policy. 2015;8:111–9.CrossRef
84.
Hammarberg K, Stafford-Bell M, Everingham S. Intended parents’ motivations and information and support needs when seeking extraterritorial compensated surrogacy. Reprod BioMed Online. 2015;31(5):689–96.PubMedCrossRef
85.
Gossett DR, Nayak S, Bhatt S, Bailey SC. What do healthy women know about the consequences of delayed childbearing? J Health Commun. 2013;18(Suppl 1):118–28.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
86.
87.
Mac Dougall K, Beyene Y, Nachtigall RD. Age shock: misperceptions of the impact of age on fertility before and after IVF in women who conceived after age 40. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(2):350–6.PubMedCrossRef
88.
Wiebe E, Chalmers A, Yager H. Delayed motherhood: understanding the experiences of women older than age 33 who are having abortions but plan to become mothers later. Can Fam Physician. 2012;58(10):e588–95.PubMedPubMedCentral
89.
Corbett SL, Frecker HM, Shapiro HM, Yudin MH. Access to fertility services for lesbian women in Canada. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(4):1077–80.PubMedCrossRef
90.
The Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Access to fertility treatment by gays, lesbians, and unmarried persons. Fertil Steril. 2009;92(4):1190–3.CrossRef
91.
The Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Oocyte or embryo donation to women of advanced age: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(2):337–40.CrossRef
92.
Vincent-Rohfritsch A, Marszalek A, Santulli P, Gayet V, Chapron C, Goffinet F, et al. Risk of perinatal complication and egg donation: role of resorting to cross-border care? J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2016;45(8):866–75.CrossRef
93.
Ahuja KK. Patient pressure: is the tide of cross-border reproductive care beginning to turn? Reprod BioMed Online. 2015;30(5):447–50.PubMedCrossRef
94.
Casey V, Crooks V. a, Snyder J, Turner L. Knowledge brokers, companions, and navigators: a qualitative examination of informal caregivers’ roles in medical tourism. Int J Equity Health. 2013;12:94.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
95.
Speier AR. Brokers, consumers and the internet: how North American consumers navigate their infertility journeys. Reprod BioMed Online. 2011;23(5):592–9.PubMedCrossRef
96.
Ikemoto LC. Reproductive tourism: equality concerns in the global market for fertility services. Law Ineq. 2009;27:277–309.
97.
Swink DR, Reich B. Outsourcing reproduction : embryos and surrogacy services in the cyberprocreation era. J Health Care Law Policy. 2011;14:241–97.
98.
Penney K, Snyder J, Crooks VA, Johnston R. Risk communication and informed consent in the medical tourism industry: a thematic content analysis of Canadian broker websites. BMC Med Ethics. 2011;12:17.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
99.
Burry KA. Reproductive medicine: where we have been, where we are, where are we going? An ethical perspective. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;196:578–80.PubMedCrossRef
100.
Donchin A. Reproductive tourism and the quest for global gender justice. Bioethics. 2010;24(7):323–32.PubMedCrossRef
101.
Schäfer D, Baumann R, Kettner M. Ethics and reproductive medicine. Hum Reprod Update. 1996;2(5):447–56.PubMedCrossRef
102.
Armour KL. An overview of surrogacy around the world: trends, questions and ethical issues. Nurs Womens Health. 2012;16:231–6.PubMedCrossRef
103.
Neri M, Turillazzi E, Pascale N, Riezzo I, Pomara C. Egg production and donation: a new frontier in the global landscape of cross-border reproductive care: ethical concerns. Curr Pharm Biotechnol. 2016;17(4):316–20.PubMedCrossRef
104.
Norton W, Crawshaw M, Hudson N, Culley L, Law C. A survey of UK fertility clinics’ approach to surrogacy arrangements. Reprod BioMed Online. 2015;31(3):327–38.PubMedCrossRef
105.
Janssens PM, Thorn P, Castilla JA, Frith L, Crawshaw M, Mochtar M, et al. Evolving minimum standards in responsible international sperm donor offspring quota. Reprod BioMed Online. 2015;30(6):568–80.PubMedCrossRef
106.
The Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Consideration of the gestational carrier: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(7):1838–41.CrossRef
107.
Loike JD, Fischbach RL. New ethical horizons in gestational surrogacy. J IVF Reprod Med Genet. 2013;1:109.CrossRef
108.
109.
Qadeer I. Social and ethical basis of legislation on surrogacy: need for debate. Indian J Med Ethics. 2009;6(1):28–31.PubMed
110.
Ergas Y. Babies without borders: human rights, human dignity and the regulation of international commercial surrogacy. Emory Int Law Rev. 2013:1–69.
111.
Melo-Martín ID. The ethics of anonymous gamete donation: is there a right to know one’s genetic origins? Hast Cent Rep. 2014;44(2):28–35.CrossRef
112.
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Use of reproductive technology for sex selection for nonmedical reasons. Fertil Steril. 2015;103(6):1418–22.CrossRef
113.
Patrizio P, Caplan AL. Ethical issues surrounding fertility preservation in cancer patients. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2010;53(4):717–26.PubMedCrossRef
114.
Cohen CB. Ethical issues regarding fertility preservation in adolescents and children. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2009;53(2):249–53.PubMedCrossRef
115.
The Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Fertility preservation and reproduction in patients facing gonadotoxic therapies: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(5):1224–31.CrossRef
116.
Schenker JG. Assisted reproduction practice: religious perspectives. Reprod BioMed Online. 2005;10(3):310–9.PubMedCrossRef
117.
Nikiforova B. Theological discourse in bioethics: general and confessional differences. Santalka Filosofija. 2006;14(1):62–76.CrossRef
118.
Sureau C. From transgression to pragmatism in reproductive medicine. Reprod Nutr Dev. 2005;45(3):307–19.PubMedCrossRef
119.
Fasouliotis SJ, Schenker JG. Social aspects in assisted reproduction. Hum Reprod Update. 1999;5(1):26–39.PubMedCrossRef
120.
121.
Lanzone A. Ethical issues in human reproduction: catholic perspectives. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2013;29(11):953–4.PubMedCrossRef
122.
Serour GI, Dickens BM. Assisted reproduction developments in the Islamic world. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2001;74(2):187–93.PubMedCrossRef
123.
Serour GI. Ethical issues in human reproduction: Islamic perspectives. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2013;29(11):949–52.PubMedCrossRef
124.
125.
Markwell HJ, Brown BF. Bioethics for clinicians: 27. Catholic bioethics CMAJ. 2001;165(2):189–92.PubMed
126.
Serour GI, Aboulghar MA, Mansour RT. Bioethics in medically assisted conception in the Muslim world. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1995;12(9):559–65.PubMedCrossRef
127.
Schenker JG. Assisted reproductive technology: perspectives in Halakha (Jewish religious law). Reprod BioMed Online. 2008;17(Suppl 3):17–24.PubMedCrossRef
128.
Inhorn MC. The new Arab man: emergent masculinities, technologies, and Islam in the Middle East. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2012.
129.
Inhorn MC. Local babies, global science: gender, religion, and in vitro fertilization in Egypt. New York: Routledge; 2003.
130.
Inhorn MC, Patrizio P. The global landscape of cross-border reproductive care: twenty key findings for the new millennium. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2012;24(3):158–63.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Cross border reproductive care (CBRC): a growing global phenomenon with multidimensional implications (a systematic and critical review)
Authors
Mahmoud Salama
Vladimir Isachenko
Evgenia Isachenko
Gohar Rahimi
Peter Mallmann
Lynn M. Westphal
Marcia C. Inhorn
Pasquale Patrizio
Publication date
01-07-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 7/2018
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1181-x

Other articles of this Issue 7/2018

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 7/2018 Go to the issue

Gamete Biology

Preincubation with glutathione ethyl ester improves the developmental competence of vitrified mouse oocytes

Technological Innovations

High post-thaw survival of ram sperm after partial freeze-drying

Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Comparison of intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcome with fresh versus frozen-thawed testicular sperm in men with nonobstructive azoospermia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Effect of pre-gravid body mass index on outcomes of pregnancies following in vitro fertilization

Assisted Reproduction Technologies

The influence of body mass index on pregnancy outcome following single-embryo transfer

Commentary

Issues related to human oocyte vitrification: a consideration of the facts