Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39243180›Full record

ReviewAsian journal of andrology2025

Nonobstructive azoospermia: an etiologic review.

Logan Hubbard, Amarnath Rambhatla, Sidney Glina

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Asian journal of andrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. GutFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 5-ALA/FeFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
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.

Logan HubbardVattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, 2799 W Grand Blvd, Detroit, MI 48202, USA.
Amarnath RambhatlaVattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, 2799 W Grand Blvd, Detroit, MI 48202, USA.
Sidney GlinaDepartment of Urology, ABC Medical School, Av Lauro Gomes, 2000, Santo André, SP 09060-870, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

abstractAzoospermia is the complete absence of spermatozoa in the ejaculate in two or more semen analyses after centrifugation. Nonobstructive azoospermia (NOA) represents the most severe form of male factor infertility accounting for 10%-15% of cases and stems from an impairment to spermatogenesis. Understanding of the hypothalamic-pituitary-testicular axis has allowed NOA to be subcategorized by anatomic and/or pathophysiologic level. The etiologies of NOA, and therefore, the differential diagnoses when considering NOA as a cause of male factor infertility, can be subcategorized and condensed into several distinct classifications. Etiologies of NOA include primary hypogonadism, secondary hypogonadism, defects in androgen synthesis and/or response, defective spermatogenesis and sperm maturation, or a mixed picture thereof. This review includes up-to-date clinical, diagnostic, cellular, and histologic features pertaining to the multitude of NOA etiologies. This in turn will provide a framework by which physicians practicing infertility can augment their clinical decision-making, patient counseling, thereby improving upon the management of men with NOA.

Indexed as

AzoospermiaHumansHypogonadismInfertility, MaleMaleSpermatogenesisTestishypergonadotropic hypogonadismhypogonadotropic hypogonadismmale factor infertilitynonobstructive azoospermia

Identifiers

PMID39243180
PMCPMC12112933

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.