4.5 Review

Reproductive outcomes of intracytoplasmic sperm injection using testicular sperm and ejaculated sperm in patients with AZFc microdeletions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

ASIAN JOURNAL OF ANDROLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 5, Pages 495-+

Publisher

WOLTERS KLUWER MEDKNOW PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.4103/aja.aja_1_21

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The meta-analysis results showed no significant differences in live birth rate, abortion rate, and clinical pregnancy rates between testicular sperm and ejaculated sperm groups in ICSI using sperm from males with AZFc microdeletions. Further studies are necessary to confirm these conclusions.
Studies have explored the assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcomes of Y-chromosome azoospermia factor c (AZFc) microdeletions, but the effect of sperm source on intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) remains unknown. To determine the ART results of ICSI using testicular sperm and ejaculated sperm from males with AZFc microdeletions, we searched Embase, Web of Science, and PubMed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis. The first meta-analysis results for 106 cycles in five studies showed no significant differences in the live birth rate between the testicular sperm group and the ejaculated sperm group (risk ratio: 0.97, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73-1.28, P = 0.82). The second meta-analysis of 106 cycles in five studies showed no difference in the abortion rate between the testicular sperm group and ejaculated sperm group (risk ratio: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.54-2.06, P = 0.87). The third meta-analysis of 386 cycles in seven studies showed no significant difference in clinical pregnancy rates between the testicular sperm group and the ejaculated sperm group (risk ratio: 1.24, 95% CI: 0.66-2.34, P = 0.50). Inevitable heterogeneity weakened our results. However, our results indicated that testicular sperm and ejaculated sperm yield similar ART outcomes, representing a meaningful result for clinical treatment. More properly designed studies are needed to further confirm our conclusions.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available