4.6 Article

Spermatogenesis in Klinefelter syndrome

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENDOCRINOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION
卷 33, 期 11, 页码 789-793

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/BF03350343

关键词

Klinefelter syndrome; spermatogenesis; sperm recovery; aneuploidy sperm; 47,XXY

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Klinefelter syndrome (KS) (47,XXY) is the most common sex chromosomal disorder, and it is a frequent form of male hypogonadism and infertility. Although the majority of these patients are azoospermic, they might have severe oligozoospermia or residual single-residual foci with spermatogenesis in the testis. Aim: We report our experience on sperm retrieval in the ejaculate and testis, and evaluate the frequency of chromosome abnormalities in sperm of KS. Subjects and methods: Eighty-four 47,XXY KS were evaluated with seminal analysis, body hair distribution, reproductive hormones, ultrasonographic scanning of the testis and prostate, bilateral testicular sperm extraction (TESE), sperm or testicular cells sex chromosomes aneuploidies. Results: Out of 84 patients, 7 (7/84; 8.3%) had sperm in the ejaculate. Out of the 77 azoospermic patients, 24 underwent TESE and 9 (9/24; 37.5%) had successful sperm recovery. The comparison of reproductive hormones, age and testicular volume did not show significant differences-between patients with and without successful sperm recovery in semen or TESE. Patients without successful sperm recovery in semen analysis or TESE had signs of hypoandrogenism more evident than patients with successful sperm recovery. Patients with KS produced a higher number of sperm aneuploidy with respect to normozoospermic fertile controls and non-genetic severely oligozoospermic men. Conclusions: Men with KS are not always sterile. In some of these patients sperm can be found in semen or in the testis, but the proportion of sperm aneuploidy is high. Signs of hypoandrogenism seem to be associated with low sperm recovery rate. (J. Endocrinol. Invest. 33: 789-793, 2010) (C) 2010, Editrice Kurtis

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据