ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2020
Testicular sperm extraction and intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcome in cancer survivors with no available cryopreserved sperm.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Testicular sperm extraction (TESE) outcomes in the context of malignant disease: a systematic review.Asian journal of andrologyPooled it
- Combined effects of urine exposure and cryopreservation on sperm quality: an in vitro study of retrograde ejaculation.Asian journal of andrology · 2026Article
- Article
- Fertility preservation before and after cancer treatment in children, adolescents, and young adults.Cancer · 2024Review
- An Assessment of Cryopreserved Semen and Testicular Tissue Collected Before and After Cancer Treatment Initiation.Cancer management and research · 2024Article
- Late adverse effects and quality of life in survivors of testicular germ cell tumour.Nature reviews. Urology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess rates of successful testicular sperm retrieval and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) outcome in cancer survivors affected by non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) or retrograde ejaculation (RE)/failure of emission (FOE).
methodsA retrospective analysis of cancer survivors who did not cryopreserve sperm prior to treatment undergoing testicular sperm extraction (TESE). Non-cancer NOA patients and neurologic RE/FOE were the control group.
resultsA total of 97 cancer survivors were offered TESE and 88 (91%) accepted. Sperm was retrieved and cryopreserved in 34/67 patients with NOA (50.7%) and in 21/21 patients affected by RE/FOE (100%). Sperm retrieval rates were similar in the control group (44.9% in NOA and 100% in RE/FOE). The ICSI cumulative pregnancy rate (60%) and live birth rate (40%) per couple in 30 NOA men did not differ from controls (50.0 and 46.5%, respectively; p = 0.399/0.670). The cumulative pregnancy rate (66.7%) and live birth rate (55.6%) in 18 RE/FOE men did not differ from the control group (38.9 and 33.3%, respectively; p = 0.181/0.315). The cancer type and the resulting infertility disorder (NOA or RE/FOE) were not associated with ICSI outcomes. Female partner age was inversely related to the cumulative live birth rate, being fourfold lower (11.5%) in women ≥ 40 years and 48.8% in younger women (p = 0.0037).
conclusionsThe rate of successful TESE and the ICSI outcome in cancer survivors with NOA and RE/FOE is the same as non-cancer azoospermic patients. Female partner age (older than 40 years) was associated with a significant reduction in live birth rates after TESE-ICSI procedures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.