Bora Altinkilic1, Adrian Pilatz2, Thorsten Diemer2, Julia Wolf2, Martin Bergmann3, Sarah Schönbrunn4, Uwe Ligges4, Hans-Christian Schuppe2, Wolfgang Weidner2. 1. Department of Urology, Pediatric Urology and Andrology, Justus-Liebig University Giessen, Rudolf-Buchheim-Str. 7, 35392, Giessen, Germany. Bora.Altinkilic@chiru.med.uni-giessen.de. 2. Department of Urology, Pediatric Urology and Andrology, Justus-Liebig University Giessen, Rudolf-Buchheim-Str. 7, 35392, Giessen, Germany. 3. Institute of Veterinary Anatomy, Histology and Embryology, Justus-Liebig University Giessen, Frankfurter Str. 98, 35392, Giessen, Germany. 4. Department of Statistics, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to assess whether CCDS might improve the outcome of testicular sperm retrieval in patients with azoospermia. Furthermore, we evaluated potential sonographic alterations of the testis before and after trifocal and Micro-TESE. METHODS: 78 patients were enrolled prospectively: 24 with obstructive azoospermia (OA) and 54 with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA). 31 of 54 patients in the NOA group had negative surgical sperm retrieval. Testicular volume, hormonal parameters and sonographical findings were compared before and after TESE. The spermatogenetic score was determined for all retrieval sites. CCDS was performed at the upper, middle and lower segment of the testis. Ultrasound parameters and peak systolic velocity (PSV) were measured pre- and post-operatively. RESULTS: Testicular volume and epididymal head size were significantly increased in OA patients compared to NOA patients. Ultrasound parameters were comparable between NOA patients with and without successful sperm retrieval. A higher intratesticular PSV was significantly correlated with a better spermatogenic score in the corresponding sonographic position. However, after adjustment for other clinical confounders, PSV does not show a significant influence on the spermatogenic score. Testicular volume decreased significantly in all patients post-operatively after 6 weeks (p < 0.001). Finally, the PSV significantly increased in all patients 24 h after surgery and nearly returned to baseline levels after 6 weeks (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A higher intratesticular PSV may be helpful as a pre-operative diagnostic parameter in mapping for better sperm retrieval, but CCDS does not help to predict successful testicular sperm retrieval after adjustment for other clinical confounders.
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to assess whether CCDS might improve the outcome of testicular sperm retrieval in patients with azoospermia. Furthermore, we evaluated potential sonographic alterations of the testis before and after trifocal and Micro-TESE. METHODS: 78 patients were enrolled prospectively: 24 with obstructive azoospermia (OA) and 54 with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA). 31 of 54 patients in the NOA group had negative surgical sperm retrieval. Testicular volume, hormonal parameters and sonographical findings were compared before and after TESE. The spermatogenetic score was determined for all retrieval sites. CCDS was performed at the upper, middle and lower segment of the testis. Ultrasound parameters and peak systolic velocity (PSV) were measured pre- and post-operatively. RESULTS: Testicular volume and epididymal head size were significantly increased in OA patients compared to NOA patients. Ultrasound parameters were comparable between NOA patients with and without successful sperm retrieval. A higher intratesticular PSV was significantly correlated with a better spermatogenic score in the corresponding sonographic position. However, after adjustment for other clinical confounders, PSV does not show a significant influence on the spermatogenic score. Testicular volume decreased significantly in all patients post-operatively after 6 weeks (p < 0.001). Finally, the PSV significantly increased in all patients 24 h after surgery and nearly returned to baseline levels after 6 weeks (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A higher intratesticular PSV may be helpful as a pre-operative diagnostic parameter in mapping for better sperm retrieval, but CCDS does not help to predict successful testicular sperm retrieval after adjustment for other clinical confounders.
Authors: J Ullrich Schwarzer; Heiko Steinfatt; Manfred Schleyer; Frank M Köhn; Klaus Fiedler; Irene von Hertwig; Gottfried Krüsmann; Wolfgang Würfel Journal: Asian J Androl Date: 2013-09-09 Impact factor: 3.285
Authors: Stephen J Bromage; Debbie A Falconer; Brian A Lieberman; Vijay Sangar; Stephen R Payne Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2006-09-05 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Alexandra Ntorkou; Athina C Tsili; Loukas Astrakas; Anna Goussia; Eleni Panopoulou; Nikolaos Sofikitis; Maria I Argyropoulou Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2020-03-30 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Jitske Eliveld; Madelon van Wely; Andreas Meißner; Sjoerd Repping; Fulco van der Veen; Ans M M van Pelt Journal: Hum Reprod Update Date: 2018-07-01 Impact factor: 15.610