Literature DB >> 10686214

Prospective comparative study between microsurgical and conventional testicular sperm extraction in non-obstructive azoospermia: follow-up by serial ultrasound examinations.

M Amer1, A Ateyah, R Hany, W Zohdy.   

Abstract

The value of testicular sperm extraction (TESE) by microdissection was evaluated according to its physiological consequences compared with open, classic surgical biopsy in the same patient. A total of 100 patients with non-obstructive azoospermia and bilateral identical testicular histology underwent bilateral diagnostic TESE via the conventional method on one side and the microsurgical method on the other side. The spermatozoa recovery rate by microdissection TESE was significantly higher than by conventional TESE (47 and 30% respectively; P < 0.05). In order to assess the safety of this new procedure, 60 patients were followed-up ultrasonographically for 1, 3 and 6 months. Acute and chronic complications were significantly lower in the microsurgical side compared with the conventional side (15 and 58.3% respectively and 3 and 30% respectively; P < 0.05). Segmental devascularization was detected in seven testes operated on conventionally, and in two testes operated on microsurgically. However, permanent devascularization could not be detected in any patient after 6 months. These findings suggest that microdissection TESE is not devoid of complications, but that it is relatively safer than the conventional technique and improves sperm yield significantly in patients with non-obstructive azoospermia.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10686214     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/15.3.653

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  39 in total

1.  Microdissection is the best way to perform sperm retrieval in men with non-obstructive azoospermy? | Opinion: Yes.

Authors:  Renato Fraietta
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2018 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.541

Review 2.  Surgical recovery of sperm in non-obstructive azoospermia.

Authors:  Tomomoto Ishikawa
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2011-11-28       Impact factor: 3.285

3.  Impact of age, follicle stimulating hormone and Johnsen's score on successful sperm retrieval by microdissection testicular sperm extraction.

Authors:  Akira Tsujimura; Yasushi Miyagawa; Tetsuya Takao; Kazutoshi Fujita; Kazuhiko Komori; Yasuhiro Matsuoka; Shingo Takada; Minoru Koga; Masami Takeyama; Hideki Fujioka; Kiyomi Matsumiya; Akihiko Okuyama
Journal:  Reprod Med Biol       Date:  2005-03-07

4.  Results of intracytoplasmic sperm injection performed with sperm retrieved by microscopic testicular sperm extraction in azoospermic patients.

Authors:  Erkan Erdem; Meriç Karacan; Ziya Çebi; Murat Uluğ; Ayşe Arvas; Teksen Çamlıbel
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2018-11

5.  Factors determining the sperm retrieval rate in fresh versus salvage micro-TESE: a comparative cohort study.

Authors:  Medhat Kamel Amer; Ahmed Ragab Ahmed; Asmaa Ahmed Abdel Hamid; Sameh Fayek GamalEl Din
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2019-01-30       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 6.  Management of non-obstructive azoospermia.

Authors:  Koji Chiba; Noritoshi Enatsu; Masato Fujisawa
Journal:  Reprod Med Biol       Date:  2016-01-18

Review 7.  The development of surgical sperm extraction and new challenges to improve the outcome.

Authors:  Noritoshi Enatsu; Koji Chiba; Masato Fujisawa
Journal:  Reprod Med Biol       Date:  2015-11-27

Review 8.  Microdissection testicular sperm extraction: an update.

Authors:  Ali A Dabaja; Peter N Schlegel
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2012-12-17       Impact factor: 3.285

Review 9.  Sperm retrieval techniques.

Authors:  Daniel H Shin; Paul J Turek
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2013-12-03       Impact factor: 14.432

10.  The Levels of Oxidative Stress Biomarkers in Rats as a Response to Different Techniques of Testicular Biopsy.

Authors:  S Resim; E B Kurutas; A B Gul; M Eren; C Benlioglu; E Efe; Y Atli
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2013-01-19       Impact factor: 0.656

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.