ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2024
Cryopreserved testicular spermatozoa among patients with azoospermia.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2024. 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.
- No difference in ICSI outcomes from cryopreserved testicular spermatozoa from patients with azoospermia or cryptozoospermia.Asian journal of andrology · 2026Article
- Non-used cryopreserved sperm among oncological patients: extra-long-term follow-up and analysis.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate cryopreserved testicular spermatozoa among patients with azoospermia.
methodsIn this retrospective study spanning from October 1993 to December 2021, we examined men diagnosed with azoospermia who underwent testicular spermatozoa cryopreservation. Data from medical records included utilization and disposal of sperm samples, age at initial cryopreservation. We analyzed the data over 20 years using Kaplan-Meier curves, compared age with the log-rank test, and assessed hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using Cox regression analysis.
resultsA total of 356 patients with a mean age of 32.1 ± 6 were included. Of these, 225 patients utilized thawed testicular sperm for fertility treatments, with 118 patients using all their frozen straws and 107 patients partially using their stored straws. Additionally, 29 patients opted for disposal (six patients partially used their testicular spermatozoa before disposal), resulting in 108 patients who neither used nor disposed of their straws. From a laboratory standpoint, nearly 90% of patients contributed a single testicular sample, which was subsequently divided and cryopreserved as straws, with a median of 4 straws per sample. Notably, in the older age group (> 35 years old), there were a significantly lower usage rate and a higher disposal rate compared to the younger age groups (p < 0.05 for both), corroborated by univariable Cox analysis.
conclusionsThis extensive study unveils unique patterns in the preservation and disposal of testicular spermatozoa among azoospermic patients. Most patients utilize a significant portion of their stored samples, while older patients tend to use their testicular spermatozoa less frequently.
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.