4.4 Article

Testicular Sperm Aspiration for Nonazoospermic Men: Sperm Retrieval and Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Outcomes

Journal

UROLOGY
Volume 84, Issue 6, Pages 1342-1346

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.08.032

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE To evaluate testicular sperm aspiration (TESA) sperm retrieval rates and intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes in nonazoospermic men. MATERIALS AND METHODS Data were collected retrospectively from 54 consecutive, nonazoospermic, infertile men who underwent TESA between March 2007 and September 2012. Sperm retrieval rates and clinical pregnancy outcomes were recorded. Patients were subgrouped based on clinical diagnosis: group 1, anejaculation (primary, situational); group 2, idiopathic severe oligoasthenozoospermia; and group 3, severe oligoasthenozoospermia after vasovasostomy. RESULTS Mean (+/- standard deviation) paternal and maternal ages were 39 +/- 7 and 35 +/- 5 years, respectively. Using TESA, sperm recovery was successful in 94% (51 of 54) of the men overall and in 100% (17 of 17) of the men in group 1, 90% (28 of 31) in group 2, and 100% (6 of 6) in group 3. Overall, 35% of the couples achieved a clinical pregnancy using TESA sperm (with a mean of 1.7 +/- 0.9 embryos transferred per cycle). The clinical pregnancy rates were 40% in group 1, 33% in group 2, and 33% in group 3 with no significant difference in paternal or maternal age between groups. CONCLUSION The data indicate that TESA yields high sperm retrieval rates in select groups of nonazoospermic infertile men, and this approach results in acceptable pregnancy rates regardless of the male infertility etiology. Randomized controlled trials comparing ejaculated vs testicular sperm are needed to assess the true benefit of TESA-intracytoplasmic sperm injection in these couples. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available