Home  |   Archive  |   Online Submission  |   News & Events  |   Subscribe  |   APFA  |   Society  |   Contact Us  |   中文版
Search   
 
Journal

Ahead of print
Authors' Accepted
    Manuscripts
new!
Current Issue
Archive
Acknowledgments
Special Issues
Browse by Category

Manuscript Submission

Online Submission
Online Review
Instruction for Authors
Instruction for Reviewers
English Corner new!

About AJA

About AJA
Editorial Board
Contact Us
News

Resources & Services

Advertisement
Subscription
Email alert
Proceedings
Reprints

Download area

Copyright licence
EndNote style file
Manuscript word template
Guidance for AJA figures
    preparation (in English)

Guidance for AJA figures
    preparation (in Chinese)

Proof-reading for the
    authors

AJA Club (in English)
AJA Club (in Chinese)

 
Abstract

Volume 25, Issue 1 (January 2023) 25, 38–42; 10.4103/aja202221

An examination of predictive markers for successful sperm extraction procedures: a linear model and systematic review

Nicholas Major1, K Russ Edwards1, Kit Simpson2, Marc Rogers3

1 Department of Urology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA
2 Department of Healthcare Leadership and Management, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA
3 Department of Urology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, USA

Correspondence: Dr. M Rogers (marc_rogers@med.unc.edu)

20-May-2022

Abstract

The authors performed a comprehensive review of current literature to create a model comparing commonly evaluated variables in male factor infertility, for example, follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), testicular volume (TV), and testosterone (T), to better predict sperm retrieval rate (SRR). Twenty-nine studies were included, 9 with data on conventional testicular sperm extraction (cTESE) for a total of 1227 patients and 20 studies including data on microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) for a total of 4760 patients. A weighted-means value of SRR, FSH, T, and TV was created, and a weighted linear regression was then used to describe associations among SRR, type of procedure, FSH, T, and TV. In this study, weighted-means values demonstrated mTESE to be superior to cTESE with an SRR of 51.9% vs 40.1%. Multiple weighted linear regressions were created to describe associations among SRR, procedure type, FSH, T, and TV. The models showed that for every 1.19 mIU ml−1 increase in FSH, there would be a significant decrease in SRR by 1.0%. Seeking to create a more clinically relevant model, FSH values were then divided into normal, moderate elevation, and significant elevation categories (FSH <10 mIU ml−1, 10–19 mIU ml−1, and >20 mIU ml−1, respectively). For an index patient undergoing cTESE, the retrieval rates would be 57.1%, 44.3%, and 31.2% for values normal, moderately elevated, and significantly elevated, respectively. In conclusion, in a large meta-analysis, mTESE was shown to be more successful than cTESE for sperm retrievals. FSH has an inverse relationship to SRR in retrieval techniques and can alone be predictive of cTESE SRR.

Keywords: follicle-stimulating hormone; meta-analysis; microtesticular sperm extraction; nonobstructive azoospermia; testicular sperm retrieval

Full Text | PDF |

 
Browse:  267
 
Asian Journal of Andrology CN 31-1795/R ISSN 1008-682X  Copyright © 2023  Shanghai Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Sciences.  All rights reserved.