ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2021
[Testicular sperm extraction in male infertility : Indications, success rates, practical implementation, and possible complications].
Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnwanted childlessness is a burden on a couple's relationship. The therapeutic spectrum of male infertility has increased significantly in recent years so that even azoospermia patients can be given biological paternity by testicular sperm extraction (TESE).
objectivesThe indications, success rates, practical implementation, and possible complications of conventional and microscopic TESE in male infertility are presented in this review.
methodsA nonsystematic search of the relevant literature was carried out.
resultsIn obstructive azoospermia (OA), primarily desobstructive surgical procedures are used, while TESE is the surgical procedure of choice in nonobstructive azoospermia (NOA). In the latter, sperm extraction can be performed conventionally or microscopically (mTESE) assisted, whereby the latter offers an advantage in terms of sperm detection rate in the case of small testicular volumes (<12 ml), chemotherapy, Klinefelter's disease and AZFc microdeletions. The sperm detection rate of TESE is about 50%. Postoperative controls are useful because of the possible induction of symptomatic hypogonadism.
conclusionBefore performing TESE, determining the hormone status and human genetic clarification are necessary. Any costs incurred and the possibility of missing sperm proof must be discussed. Close cooperation between andrologists, gynecologists, reproductive physicians, and human geneticists is necessary. All in all, TESE is a safe surgical procedure with a low complication rate.
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.