Literature DB >> 9610572

The treatment of obstructive azoospermia in male infertility--past, present, and future.

H Takihara1.   

Abstract

Until recently, the primary treatment option for infertile men with obstructive azoospermia was the reconstruction of the male seminal tract when the causes of obstruction were reconstructable. For unreconstructable causes, such as congenital absence of the vas deferens, the primary treatment option involved implantation of an alloplastic artificial spermatocele for subsequent percutaneous retrieval of sperm. Retrieved sperm was then used for intrauterine insemination. The introduction of in vitro fertilization (IVF), performed together with microsurgical epididymal sperm aspiration (MESA), provided new frontiers for the treatment of unreconstructable obstructive azoospermic infertility in men. Against this background, the author reviewed the past and present status of the treatment of obstructive male infertility for the purpose of seeking a future course for the treatment of obstructive azoospermia. At the Andrology Clinic, 246 (26%) of 963 infertile males revealed azoospermia and 72 (29%) of these 246 patients showed obstruction at the seminal tract, showing that 7.5% of male infertility cases were caused by ductal obstruction. Microsurgical reconstruction of the seminal tract was performed, including vasovasostomy (29 cases), epididymovasostomy (18 cases), and artificial spermatocele implantation (20 cases). Vasovasostomy resulted in an 81.3% patency rate and a 37.5% fertility rate. Epididymovasostomy showed a 71% patency rate and a 29% fertility rate. In contrast, artificial spermatocele implantation resulted in positive sperm present in the aspirated fluid in 33.3% of the patients; however, no pregnancy was achieved by artificial insemination using aspirated sperm. MESA together with assisted reproductive technology (ART) in 14 patients showed 79% ovum fertilization rates and a 35.7% clinical pregnancy rate. Thus, this new technique could open new frontiers for the future treatment of obstruction of the male seminal tract which cannot be reconstructed by vasovasostomy or vasoepididymostomy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9610572     DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(98)00089-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  6 in total

1.  The difficult MESA: findings from tubuli recti sperm aspiration.

Authors:  Ulrike Zenke; Liza Jalalian; Shehua Shen; Paul J Turek
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 2.  Physical deformities relevant to male infertility.

Authors:  Rajender Singh; Alaa J Hamada; Laura Bukavina; Ashok Agarwal
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2012-02-21       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 3.  ALWAYS ICSI? A SWOT analysis.

Authors:  E Bosch; J J Espinós; F Fabregues; J Fontes; J García-Velasco; J Llácer; A Requena; M A Checa; J Bellver
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 4.  The evolution and refinement of vasoepididymostomy techniques.

Authors:  Peter T Chan
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2012-11-19       Impact factor: 3.285

5.  In vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection for male infertility.

Authors:  Rubina Merchant; Goral Gandhi; Gautam N Allahbadia
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2011-01

6.  The performance of transrectal ultrasound in the diagnosis of seminal vesicle defects: a comparison with magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Xu Chen; Hua Wang; Rong-Pei Wu; Hui Liang; Xiao-Peng Mao; Cheng-Qiang Mao; Hong-Zhang Zhu; Shao-Peng Qiu; Dao-Hu Wang
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.285

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.