ReviewFrontiers in endocrinology2024
Non-invasive biomarkers for sperm retrieval in non-obstructive patients: a comprehensive review.
Review in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Analysis of the Correlation Between Circulating Cell-Free DNA (CfDNA) Levels and Serious Abnormal Sperm Parameters.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Article
- Exploratory Evaluation of Combined Hormonal Indices in Non-Obstructive Azoospermia: Diagnostic Performance and Prediction of TESE Success.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Stratified profiling of azoospermia: Differentiating histological subtypes with seminal plasma metabolic signatures.Journal of biomedical research · 2026Article
- Biological and clinical factors predicting sperm retrieval success in men with non-obstructive azoospermia.Reproduction & fertility · 2026Review
- Review
- Article
- Apoptosis in non-obstructive azoospermia: pathway crosstalk, cell-type vulnerability, and translational implications.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
- Global Andrology Forum (GAF) Clinical Guidelines on the Management of Non-obstructive Azoospermia: Bridging the Gap between Controversy and Consensus.The world journal of men's health · 2026Article
- The Effect of Hydroalcoholic Extract ofFood science & nutrition · 2025Article
- Serum expression signature of TUG1, MALAT1, miR-483, and miR-141 and their targets TGF-β1 and STAT3 in severe male factor infertility.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Historical perspective of surgical sperm retrieval techniques for nonobstructive azoospermia.Asian journal of andrology · 2025Article
- The Small RNA Landscape in Azoospermia: Implications for Male Infertility and Sperm Retrieval-A Preliminary Study.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Genetic insights into non-obstructive azoospermia: Implications for diagnosis and TESE outcomes.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Reduction of Prostate Cancer Risk: Role of Frequent Ejaculation-Associated Mechanisms.Cancers · 2025Review
- Letrozole and Crocin: Protecting Leydig Cells and Modulating Androgen Receptor and CYP19 Gene Expression in Busulfan-Induced Azoospermia.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- From stress signals to fertility challenges: the role of damage-associated molecular patterns in male reproduction.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Predictors of Successful Testicular Sperm Extraction: A New Era for Men with Non-Obstructive Azoospermia.Biomedicines · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent advancements in reproductive medicine have guided novel strategies for addressing male infertility, particularly in cases of non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA). Two prominent invasive interventions, namely testicular sperm extraction (TESE) and microdissection TESE (micro-TESE), have emerged as key techniques to retrieve gametes for assisted reproduction technologies (ART). Both heterogeneity and complexity of NOA pose a multifaceted challenge to clinicians, as the invasiveness of these procedures and their unpredictable success underscore the need for more precise guidance. Seminal plasma can be aptly regarded as a liquid biopsy of the male reproductive tract, encompassing secretions from the testes, epididymides, seminal vesicles, bulbourethral glands, and prostate. This fluid harbors a variety of cell-free nucleic acids, microvesicles, proteins, and metabolites intricately linked to gonadal activity. However, despite numerous investigations exploring potential biomarkers from seminal fluid, their widespread inclusion into the clinical practice remains limited. This could be partially due to the complex interplay of diverse clinical and genetic factors inherent to NOA that likely contributes to the absence of definitive biomarkers for residual spermatogenesis. It is conceivable that the integration of clinical data with biomarkers could increase the potential in predicting surgical procedure outcomes and their choice in NOA cases. This comprehensive review addresses the challenge of sperm retrieval in NOA through non-invasive biomarkers. Moreover, we delve into promising perspectives, elucidating innovative approaches grounded in multi-omics methodologies, including genomics, transcriptomics and proteomics. These cutting-edge techniques, combined with the clinical and genetics features of patients, could improve the use of biomarkers in personalized medical approaches, patient counseling, and the decision-making continuum. Finally, Artificial intelligence (AI) holds significant potential in the realm of combining biomarkers and clinical data, also in the context of identifying non-invasive biomarkers for sperm retrieval.
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.