| Literature DB >> 34552776 |
Medhat Amer1,2, Emad Fakhry1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: : To review the debate about the routine use of cryopreserved testicular sperm for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) from patients with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA), as some authors suggest repeating sperm retrieval in such cases due to poorer ICSI results when frozen-thawed testicular sperm is used compared with fresh sperm.Entities:
Keywords: Azoospermia; intracytoplasmic sperm injection; non-obstructive azoospermia; sperm cryopreservation; testicular sperm
Year: 2021 PMID: 34552776 PMCID: PMC8451649 DOI: 10.1080/2090598X.2021.1932303
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arab J Urol ISSN: 2090-598X
Figure 1.Flow diagram of the search results
Comparison of ICSI cycles using fresh vs frozen–thawed surgical retrieved testicular sperm
| Publication | Freezing methodology | Compared with | Frozen NOA cycles, n | Fresh cycles, n | Fertilisation rate (2 PN%), % | Good embryo, % | CPR/ET, % | IR, % | LBR/ET, % | Significant results | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frozen sperm | Fresh sperm | Frozen sperm | Fresh sperm | Frozen sperm | Fresh sperm | Frozen sperm | Fresh sperm | Frozen sperm | Fresh sperm | ||||||
| Testicular tissue, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then nitrogen vapour chamber (–10°C/min) for 20 min | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 14 | 43.5 | 77.1 | 21.4 | 10.8 | 9.1 | No difference in 2 PN%, embryo quality, CPR, IR and LBR between the two studied groups | |||||||
| Testicular sperm suspension, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then Nicool Semi-programmable freezer (two steps) ( | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 42 | 55.5 | 74.6 | 21.4 | 10.7 | 16.7 | No difference in 2 PN%, embryo quality, CPR, IR and LBR between the two studied groups | |||||||
| Testicular sperm suspension, TEST-citrate-yolk buffer with 12% glycerol then two step controlled cooling | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA (OA cases were also compared) | 9 | 55.7 | 66.7 | 24.1 | 33.3 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR, IR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||||||||
| Testicular sperm suspension, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then 15 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (OA cases were also compared) | 11 | 9.1 | No difference in CPR between the two studied groups but the frozen sperm CPR was significantly lower in NOA than OA cases | |||||||||||
| Testicular sperm suspension, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then nitrogen vapour-containing chamber (–10°C/min) | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (OA cases were also compared) | 63 | 51.0 | 25.8 | 17.4 | 23.8 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR, IR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||||||||
| Testicular sperm suspension, sperm freezing medium (Medicult) then 10–15 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (spermatid injection cases were also studied) | 37 | 60.0 | 84.2 | 24.3 | No difference in 2 PN%, embryo quality, CPR between the two studied groups | |||||||||
| Testicular sperm suspension, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then 16 min in LNV (two steps) | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 42 | 59.3 | 18.7 | 7.4 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR and IR between the 2 studied groups | |||||||||
| Testicular tissue, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then Nicool semi-programmable freezer (two steps) ( | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases versus own frozen sperms | 13 | 35.2 | 66.7 | 15.4 | 5.9 | 15.4 | No difference in 2 PN%, embryo quality, CPR and IR between the two studied groups | |||||||
| Testicular tissue, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then 15 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA and OA cases | 24 | 65.8 | 53.8 | 62.5 | 25.0 | 41.7 | Differences in CPR, IR and LBR between the frozen (better) and the fresh group | |||||||
| Testicular tissue, sperm freeze (FertiPro) then 15 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 93 | 66.4 | 23.7 | 6.6 | 18.3 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR, IR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||||||||
| Sperm freezing protocol was not mentioned | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 2 | 19.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | No difference in 2 PN% and CPR between the two studied groups | |||||||||
| Testicular sperm suspension, sperm freezing med. (unspecified) then 15 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (OA cases were also compared) | 7 | 63.4 | 57.1 | 57.1 | A difference in CPR and LBR in favour of the frozen sperm group | |||||||||
| Testicular sperm suspension, Sperm Freeze (FertiPro) then 30 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (OA cases were also compared) | 84 | 64.7 | 23.8 | 12.3 | 21.4 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR, IR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||||||||
| Testicular tissue, sperm freezing med. (Medicult) then controlled rate freezer (two steps) | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (OA cases were also compared) | 46 | 45.7 | 85.0 | 34.8 | 19.6 | No difference in 2 PN%, embryo quality, CPR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||||||||
| Testicular tissue, sperm freezing med. (Vitrolife) then nitrogen vapour-containing Styrofoam box 20–30 min | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 39 | 46.8 | 51.3 | 43.6 | 30.8 | No difference in 2 PN%, embryo quality, CPR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||||||||
| Testicular sperm suspension, sperm freezing med. (Origio) then LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (Non-mosaic KF cases) | 17 | 43.2 | 55.4 | 23.5 | 17.2 | 23.5 | Differences in 2 PN%, embryo quality and CPR in favour of the fresh sperm group | |||||||
| Testicular sperm suspension, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then 5–10 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 600 | 22.3 | 21.0 | No difference in CPR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||||||||||
| Testicular tissue, cryosperm med. (Medicult) then computerised cell freezer (CryoMagic-Plus; two steps) | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 49 | 68.5 | 66.3 | 38.1 | 56.3 | 4.8 | A difference in IR in favour of the frozen sperm group | |||||||
| Testicular sperm suspension, sperm freezing med. (Origio) then nitrogen vapour in a plastic freezing box | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (cryptozoospermic cases were also compared) | 48 | 49.0 | 18.8 | 12.2 | 18.8 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR, LBR and IR between the two studied groups | ||||||||
| Testicular sperm suspension, sperm freeze (Medi-con) then 15 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (Fresh oocytes) (OA cases and cryptozoospermic cases were also compared) | 78 | 52.6 | 34.3 | 12.5 | A difference in LBR in favour of the fresh sperm group | |||||||||
| Testicular sperm suspension, sperm freeze (FertiPro) then 15 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (OA cases were also compared) | 36 | 36.0 | 14.3 | 3.6 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR and LBR between the two studied groups | |||||||||
| Testicular sperm suspension, sperm freezing med. (Vitrolife) then 30 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 110 | 234 | 44.2 | 53.7 | 40.5 | 33.5 | 34.5 | Differences in CPR and LBR in favour of the fresh sperm group | ||||||
ET: embryo transfer; IR, implantation rate; LBR: live-birth rate; LNV: liquid nitrogen vapour; med.: medium.
Figure 2.Nicool LM10 semi-programmable freezer
The three meta-analyses studying the effects of testicular sperm freezing on the ICSI outcome in NOA
| Meta-analysis | Revised years | Revised studies, | ICSI cycles, | Significant results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nicopoullos | 1995–2002 | 17 | 1476 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR and ongoing pregnancy rate between the two groups, but implantation rate was higher in the fresh sperm group. |
| Ohlander | Before 2012 | 11 | 573 | No difference in 2 PN% and CPR between the two groups. |
| Yu | 1997–2017 | 17 | 1184 | No difference in 2 PN%, embryo quality, CPR, implantation rate and live-birth rate between the studied groups. |
A comparison between the different policies while dealing with a NOA case
| Policy | Indications | Advantages | Disadvantages | Special counselling |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Expected positive cases: previous positive TESE, cryptozoospermic ejaculate or virtual azoospermia (pervious presence of spermatozoa in the ejaculate), favourable previous histopathological diagnosis such as hypospermatogenesis, maturation arrest at spermatid, mixed patterns with normal spermatogenesis. | 1. The use of fresh testicular sperm sample with no fear of losing sperm motility after freezing. | 1. Pointless ovarian stimulation, risk of hyperstimulation, financial burden if no spermatozoa were retrieved. | Risk of finding no sperms is great, so the couple should accept this fact and according to their preference, oocyte retrieval can be cancelled or the oocytes are collected and vitrified for future hope: Possibility of finding sperm in the future in a redo TESE, spontaneously in extended ejaculated sperm pellet analysis, hormonal treatment or future advances in NOA management (spermatid injection, | |
| 1. Normal or moderate size testicle and if the couple accept the minor risk of testicular sperm loss after freezing and thawing. | 1. Avoidance of unnecessary ovarian stimulation, risk of ovarian hyperstimulation also the ICSI cycle can be started while knowing that the couple have an opportunity to achieve pregnancy. Freedom to proceed into an ICSI cycle at any time appropriate for the couple. | 1. Risk of testicular sperm loss after freezing and thawing. Survival of frozen-thawed samples is not uniform in all centres (20–90%), while repeating the sperm retrieval procedure cannot be done before 3 [ | There is always a possibility that the TESE procedure be repeated on the occasion of finding no motile spermatozoa in the frozen-thawed samples, so the husband must be present in the centre and should be prepared for a redo TESE. This possibility is higher in patients with very low sperm count and viability. |
AZF: Azoospermia factor; IVF: in vitro fertilisation; OPU: ovum pickup.