Literature DB >> 30516925

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

Renato Fraietta1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Keywords:  Azoospermia; Microdissection; Sperm Retrieval

Mesh：

Year:  2018        PMID： 30516925      PMCID： PMC6442177          DOI： 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2018.06.02

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Braz J Urol        ISSN： 1677-5538            Impact factor:   1.541


× No keyword cloud information.
  16 in total

1.  Testicular sperm extraction with intracytoplasmic sperm injection for nonobstructive azoospermia: testicular histology can predict success of sperm retrieval.

Authors:  L M Su; G D Palermo; M Goldstein; L L Veeck; Z Rosenwaks; P N Schlegel
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Conventional multiple or microdissection testicular sperm extraction: a comparative study.

Authors:  A Tsujimura; K Matsumiya; Y Miyagawa; A Tohda; H Miura; K Nishimura; M Koga; M Takeyama; H Fujioka; A Okuyama
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 6.918

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

Authors:  M Amer; A Ateyah; R Hany; W Zohdy
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 6.918

4.  Structural and functional changes to the testis after conventional versus microdissection testicular sperm extraction.

Authors:  Ranjith Ramasamy; Neda Yagan; Peter N Schlegel
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  Testicular sperm extraction: microdissection improves sperm yield with minimal tissue excision.

Authors:  P N Schlegel
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 6.918

6.  Microsurgical TESE versus conventional TESE for ICSI in non-obstructive azoospermia: a randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Giovanni M Colpi; Elisabetta M Colpi; Guido Piediferro; Daniela Giacchetta; Giacomo Gazzano; Fabrizio M Castiglioni; M Cristina Magli; Luca Gianaroli
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.828

Review 7.  Which is the best sperm retrieval technique for non-obstructive azoospermia? A systematic review.

Authors:  P Donoso; H Tournaye; P Devroey
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2007-09-24       Impact factor: 15.610

8.  Salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction after failed conventional testicular sperm extraction in patients with nonobstructive azoospermia.

Authors:  Akira Tsujimura; Yasushi Miyagawa; Tetsuya Takao; Shingo Takada; Minoru Koga; Masami Takeyama; Kiyomi Matsumiya; Hideki Fujioka; Akihiko Okuyama
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Conventional versus microdissection testicular sperm extraction for nonobstructive azoospermia.

Authors:  Hiroshi Okada; Masaki Dobashi; Takafumi Yamazaki; Isao Hara; Masato Fujisawa; Soichi Arakawa; Sadao Kamidono
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Clinical comparison of conventional testicular sperm extraction and microdissection techniques for non-obstructive azoospermia.

Authors:  Ibrahim Fathi Ghalayini; Mohammed A Al-Ghazo; Osama Bani Hani; Rami Al-Azab; Ibrahim Bani-Hani; Faheem Zayed; Yazan Haddad
Journal:  J Clin Med Res       Date:  2011-05-19
View more
  1 in total

1.  Microdissection TESE versus conventional TESE for men with nonobstructive azoospermia undergoing sperm retrieval.

Authors:  Sandro C Esteves
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2022 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.050
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.