ArticleReproductive medicine and biology
Differences in clinical outcomes between men with mosaic Klinefelter syndrome and those with non-mosaic Klinefelter syndrome.
Article in Reproductive medicine and biology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the predictors of successful sperm retrieval of micro-TESE in cases with mosaic Klinefelter versus cases with non-mosaic Klinefelter: a prospective case series study.Basic and clinical andrology · 2025Article
- Differences in clinical outcomes between men with mosaic Klinefelter syndrome and those with non-mosaic Klinefelter syndrome.Reproductive medicine and biologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study compared the clinical outcomes of men with Klinfelter syndrome based on karyotype. Methods: The authors analyzed the outcomes of microdissection testicular sperm extraction (micro-TESE) performed on 57 patients with Klinfelter syndrome (KS) at our clinic. Results: The average ages of the non-mosaic and mosaic KS groups were 32.2 ± 4.8 and 45.9 ± 13.1 years, respectively. The sperm retrieval rates of the non-mosaic and mosaic KS groups were 46.5% (20/43) and 50.0% (7/14), respectively. The fertilization rates after intracytoplasmic sperm injection did not significantly differ between the non-mosaic and mosaic KS groups. The mosaic KS group had higher cleavage and blastocyst development rates than the non-mosaic KS group (72.2% vs. 96.2% and 30.5% vs. 44.7%, respectively). The group using motile sperm had better outcomes than the group using immotile sperm. The embryo transfer outcomes of the non-mosaic and mosaic KS groups did not significantly differ (clinical pregnancy rate: 28.0% vs. 20.7%, miscarriage rate: 14.3% vs. 33.3%, production rate per transfer: 22.0% vs. 13.8%, and production rate per case: 58.8% vs. 57.1%). Conclusions: Compared with the non-mosaic KS group, the mosaic KS group had significantly better intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes because of the higher utilization rate of motile sperm.
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.