Literature DB >> 34410586

Microdissection testicular sperm extraction (micro-TESE) in men with infertility due to nonobstructive azoospermia: summary of current literature.

Arnold P P Achermann1,2,3, Thairo A Pereira2, Sandro C Esteves4,5,6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Nonobstructive azoospermia (NOA) is associated with intrinsic testicular defects that severely impair sperm production. Although NOA invariably leads to infertility, focal sperm production may exist in the testicles of affected patients, which can be retrieved and used for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) to generate healthy offspring. However, geographic locations of testicular sperm producing-areas are uncertain, making microsurgical-guided sperm retrieval (microdissection testicular sperm extraction; micro-TESE) an attractive method to identify and retrieve sperm in patients with NOA due to spermatogenic failure. Given the widespread use of micro-TESE, its effectiveness in harvesting sperm and related potential complications need to be clarified.
METHODS: We queried PubMed/MEDLINE for studies published in English, from inception to May 2021, concerning the effect of micro-TESE on sperm retrieval rate (SRR), complication rate and ICSI pregnancy rate-using retrieved testicular sperm in subfertile couples where the male had NOA.
RESULTS: We found 116 articles, including 70 original papers, 32 review articles, and 14 systematic reviews. The evidence accounted for 4895 patients. Micro-TESE retrieved sperm in 46.6% of men with NOA, but SRRs varied considerably (18.4-70.8%) and were mainly related to the treated population characteristics. Concerning the general population of NOA patients who have not undergone previous sperm retrieval (naïve population), the SRR by micro-TESE was 46.8% (1833 of 3914 patients; range 20-70.8%; 28 studies). In studies reporting SR by micro-TESE for men who had failed percutaneous testicular sperm aspiration or non-microsurgical testicular sperm extraction, the SRR was 39.1% (127 of 325 patients; range 18.4-57.1%; 4 studies). Data on adverse events indicated that micro-TESE was associated with low (~ 3%) short-term postoperative complication rates. The fertilizing ability of testicular sperm retrieved by micro-TESE and used for ICSI was adequate (~ 57%), whereas clinical pregnancy and live birth were obtained in 39% and 24% of couples who had an embryo transfer, respectively. The health of the resulting children seems reassuring, but the evidence is limited. The procedure increases sperm retrieval success compared to non-microsurgical retrieval methods, particularly in men with Sertoli cell-only testicular histopathology.
CONCLUSION: We concluded that micro-TESE is an effective and safe method to retrieve sperm from men with NOA-related infertility, with potential advantages over non-microsurgical methods. Nevertheless, high-quality, head-to-head comparative randomized controlled trials by sperm retrieval method, focusing on SRR, live birth rate and assessing long-term adverse events and health of children conceived using testicular sperm from NOA patients are lacking. Therefore, further research is required to determine the full clinical implications of micro-TESE in male infertility treatment.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Assisted reproductive technology; Azoospermia; Intracytoplasmic sperm injection; Male infertility; Micro-TESE; Sperm retrieval

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34410586     DOI: 10.1007/s11255-021-02979-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol        ISSN: 0301-1623            Impact factor:   2.370


  98 in total

1.  Intracytoplasmic sperm injection with cryopreserved testicular spermatozoa.

Authors:  M Gil-Salom; J Romero; C Rubio; A Ruiz; J Remohí; A Pellicer
Journal:  Mol Cell Endocrinol       Date:  2000-11-27       Impact factor: 4.102

2.  Pregnancies after testicular sperm extraction and intracytoplasmic sperm injection in non-obstructive azoospermia.

Authors:  P Devroey; J Liu; Z Nagy; A Goossens; H Tournaye; M Camus; A Van Steirteghem; S Silber
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 6.918

3.  Sperm retrieval rates by micro-TESE versus conventional TESE in men with non-obstructive azoospermia-the assumption of independence in effect sizes might lead to misleading conclusions.

Authors:  Sandro C Esteves; Ranjith Ramasamy; Giovanni M Colpi; José F Carvalho; Peter N Schlegel
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2020-06-18       Impact factor: 15.610

Review 4.  An update on the clinical assessment of the infertile male. [corrected].

Authors:  Sandro C Esteves; Ricardo Miyaoka; Ashok Agarwal
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 2.365

5.  Conventional in-vitro fertilization versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection for patients requiring microsurgical sperm aspiration.

Authors:  S J Silber; Z P Nagy; J Liu; H Godoy; P Devroey; A C Van Steirteghem
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 6.918

6.  Sperm recovery and ICSI outcomes in men with non-obstructive azoospermia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Giovanni Corona; Suks Minhas; Aleksander Giwercman; Carlo Bettocchi; Marij Dinkelman-Smit; Gert Dohle; Ferdinando Fusco; Ates Kadioglou; Sabine Kliesch; Zsolt Kopa; Csilla Krausz; Fiore Pelliccione; Alessandro Pizzocaro; Jens Rassweiler; Paolo Verze; Linda Vignozzi; Wolfgang Weidner; Mario Maggi; Nikolaos Sofikitis
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2019-11-05       Impact factor: 15.610

Review 7.  Intracytoplasmic sperm injection for male infertility and consequences for offspring.

Authors:  Sandro C Esteves; Matheus Roque; Giuliano Bedoschi; Thor Haahr; Peter Humaidan
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 8.  Clinical management of infertile men with nonobstructive azoospermia.

Authors:  Sandro C Esteves
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2015 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.285

Review 9.  Trends of male factor infertility, an important cause of infertility: A review of literature.

Authors:  Naina Kumar; Amit Kant Singh
Journal:  J Hum Reprod Sci       Date:  2015 Oct-Dec

Review 10.  Non-obstructive azoospermia: current and future perspectives.

Authors:  Tharu Tharakan; Rong Luo; Channa N Jayasena; Suks Minhas
Journal:  Fac Rev       Date:  2021-01-26
View more
  4 in total

1.  Recombinant gonadotropin therapy to improve spermatogenesis in nonobstructive azoospermic patients - A proof of concept study.

Authors:  Rita Jakubcionyte Laursen; Birgit Alsbjerg; Helle Olesen Elbaek; Betina Boel Povlsen; Kirsten Brock Spanggaard Jensen; Jette Lykkegaard; Sandro C Esteves; Peter Humaidan
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2022 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.050

2.  Combined Trifocal and Microsurgical Testicular Sperm Extraction Enhances Sperm Retrieval Rate in Low-Chance Retrieval Non-Obstructive Azoospermia.

Authors:  Marco Falcone; Luca Boeri; Massimiliano Timpano; Lorenzo Cirigliano; Mirko Preto; Giorgio I Russo; Federica Peretti; Ilaria Ferro; Natalia Plamadeala; Paolo Gontero
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-07-13       Impact factor: 4.964

Review 3.  Microsurgical Management of Male Infertility: Compelling Evidence That Collaboration with Qualified Male Reproductive Urologists Enhances Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Outcomes.

Authors:  Jessica Marinaro; Marc Goldstein
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-08-06       Impact factor: 4.964

4.  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

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.