Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36303631›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in reproductive health2022

Is testicular microdissection the only way to retrieve sperm for non-obstructive azoospermic men?

Marcelo Vieira, Marcos Alécio Bispo de Andrade, Eduesley Santana-Santos

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in reproductive health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06702397 (Preliminary Results of Microsurgical Testicular Exploration for Sperm Retrieval in Azoospermic Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06702397 nacompletednot on this map

Preliminary Results of Microsurgical Testicular Exploration for Sperm Retrieval in Azoospermic Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Operating Microscope vs. Surgical Loupes

TypeinterventionalSponsorA.O.U. Città della Salute e della ScienzaRan2022 to 2024Enrolled42ConditionsAzoospermia, NonobstructiveArmsMicroscope, Surgical loupes
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Marcelo VieiraPrograma de Atendimento Integral ao Homem (PAIH), São Paulo, Brazil.
Marcos Alécio Bispo de AndradeFellow in Andrology at Aliança de Laboratórios para Fertilização Assistida, São Paulo, Brazil.
Eduesley Santana-SantosGraduate Nursing Program, Federal University of Sergipe, São Cristóvão, Sergipe, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Men presenting with non-obstructive azoospermia are the most challenging clinical scenario for an infertile couple. Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) with testicular sperm retrieval gave a chance for biological fatherhood once sperm can be found, but unfortunately sperm recovery rate (SSR) is something near 50%, leading to a discussion about what surgical retrieval technique is the best. Historically sperm have been retrieved using conventional Testicular Sperm Extraction (c-TESE), Testicular Sperm Aspiration (TESA), a combination of Testicular Fine Needle Aspiration (TfNA)/c-TESE, Testicular Microdissection (TM) and Open Testicular Mapping (OTEM). c-TESE published in 1995 by Devroey and cols. consists of testis delivery, a large unique albuginea incision and extraction of a portion from the majority of testicular tubules. TESA published in 1996 by Lewin and cols. is done percutaneously using a 21-23 gauge needle and a syringe to aspire testicular tubules. TfNA was published in 1965 by Obrant and Persson as an aspiration biopsy and cytological exam to verify sperm production. In 1999 Turek and cols. published the use of TfNA combined with c-TESE for sperm retrieval. In 1999, Peter Schlegel published a technique using a microsurgical approach to identify more probable sperm production areas inside the testicle that could be excised with better precision and less tissue. OTEM is a multiple biopsy approach, published in 2020 by Vieira and cols., based on TfNA principles but done at the same time without albuginea opening or surgical microscope need. Since Testicular Microdissection publication, the method became the gold standard for sperm retrieval, allowing superior SSR with minimal tissue removal, but the amount of testicular dissection to find more probable spermatogenesis areas, difficulties in comparative design studies, diversity TM results among doctors and other methods that can achieve very similar results we question TM superiority. The objective is review existing literature and discuss advantages and disadvantages of all the methods for sperm retrieval in non-obstructive azoospermia.

Indexed as

azoospermiaintracytoplasmic sperm injectionmale infertilityreproductive techniquessperm retrievaltreatment options

Identifiers

PMID36303631
PMCPMC9580663

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.