Fertile battle
The new International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) ovulatory disorder classification: PRO and CON

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2023.01.043Get rights and content

Section snippets

PRO: For the new international federation of gynecology and obstetrics ovulatory disorder classification: If it ain't broke, don't fix it?

Pro 1: Adam H. Balen, M.D., D.Sc.

Pro 2: Malcolm G. Munro, M.D.

The new classification of disorders of ovulation has stirred up a healthy debate about the need for change and brings to mind the phrase from which the title of this article derives “I know it’s an ugly-looking antenna, but it gets the job done, and if it ain't broke, don't fix it” (1). The human condition, however, is about striving to improve what we have and enhance the utility of any available tools. To quote Henry Ford “We do

CON: Against the modified classification of women presenting with ovulatory disorders proposed by figo—Will it really change the future care of those patients?

Con 1 : Bart C.J.M. Fauser, M.D., Ph.D.

Con 2: Helen C. O’Neill, B.Sc., M.Sc., Ph.D.

Con 3: Bruno Lunenfeld, M.D., Ph.D.

The FIGO relies on opinions and consensus in the midst of a digital transformation, potentially allowing for a more accurate annotation and clearer classification of health conditions in an automated and replicable capacity? We believe that at the present time, a data-first, patient-centric approach to diagnostics, which uses electronic health records, imaging, biobanks, and

References (42)

  • A.E. Morrison et al.

    A review of the pathophysiology of functional hypothalamic amenorrhoea in women subject to psychological stress, disordered eating, excessive exercise or a combination of these factors

    Clin Endocrinol (Oxf)

    (2021)
  • M.G. Munro et al.

    The FIGO ovulatory disorders classification system

    Fertil Steril

    (2022)
  • C. Wijeyeratne et al.

    Ethnic specific PCOS

    Expert Rev Endocrinol Metab

    (2013)
  • A.H. Balen et al.

    WHO recommendations for the management of anovulatory infertility in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS)

    Hum Reprod Update

    (2016)
  • F. Day et al.

    Large-scale genome-wide meta-analysis of polycystic ovary syndrome suggests shared genetic architecture for different diagnosis criteria

    PLoS Genet

    (2018)
  • D. Hiam et al.

    The genetics of polycystic ovary syndrome: an overview of candidate gene systematic reviews and genome-wide association studies

    J Clin Med

    (2019)
  • E.R. Vázquez-Martínez et al.

    DNA methylation in the pathogenesis of polycystic ovary syndrome

    Reprod (Camb Engl)

    (2019)
  • A. Soubry et al.

    Obesity-related DNA methylation at imprinted genes in human sperm: results from the TIEGER study

    Clin Epigenetics

    (2016)
  • R. Potabattula et al.

    Male obesity effects on sperm and next-generation cord blood DNA methylation

    PLoS One

    (2019)
  • V. Insler et al.

    Functional classification of patients selected for gonadotropic therapy

    Obstet Gynecol

    (1968)
  • B. Lunenfeld et al.

    Classification of amenorrhoeic states and their treatment by ovulation induction

    Clin Endocrinol (Oxf)

    (1974)
  • A.H.B. reports that he was a coauthor of the FIGO Committee on Menstrual Disorders and Related Health Impacts system for classification of causes of ovulatory disorders. M.G.M. was a coauthor of the FIGO Committee on Menstrual Disorders and Related Health Impacts' system for classification of causes of ovulatory disorders; Consultant to AbbVie Inc, American Regent, Daiichi Sankyo, Myovant Sciences, and Pharmacosmos. H.C.O. has nothing to disclose. B.L. has nothing to disclose. B.C.J.M.F. has nothing to disclose.

    Correspondence: Richard S. Legro, M.D., H103, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Penn State College of Medicine, 500 University Drive, Hershey, PA 17033 (E-mail: [email protected]).

    Disclaimer: Authors for “fertile battles” are chosen to represent the full breadth of opinions. Individual authors, even within one side of the debate, do not necessarily agree with all viewpoints expressed.

    View full text