Can the rapid identification of mature spermatozoa during microdissection testicular sperm extraction guide operative planning?
The minimum sperm count and quality that must be identified during microdissection testicular sperm extraction (micro-TESE) to deem the procedure successful remains to be established. We conducted a retrospective study of 81 consecutive men with non-obstructive azoospermia who underwent a primary (first) micro-TESE between March 2007 and October 2013. Final assessment of sperm recovery [reported on the day of (intracytoplasmic sperm injection) ICSI] was recorded as (i) successful (available spermatozoa for ICSI) or (ii) unsuccessful (no spermatozoa for ICSI). The decision to perform a unilateral (with limited or complete microdissection) or bilateral micro-TESE was guided by the intra-operative identification of sperm recovery (≥5 motile or non-motile sperm) from the first testicle. Overall, sperm recovery was successful in 56% (45/81) of the men. A unilateral micro-TESE was performed in 47% (38/81) of the men (based on intra-operative identification of sperm) and in 100% (38/38) of these men, spermatozoa was found on final assessment. In 42% (16/38) of the unilateral cases, a limited microdissection was performed (owing to the rapid intra-operative identification of sperm). The remaining 43 men underwent a bilateral micro-TESE and 16% (7/43) of these men had sperm identified on final assessment. The cumulative ICSI pregnancy rates (per cycle started and per embryo transfer) were 47% (21/45) and 60% (21/35), respectively, with a mean (±SD) of 1.9 ± 1.0 embryos transferred. The data demonstrate that intra-operative assessment of sperm recovery can correctly identify those men that require a unilateral micro-TESE. Moreover, the rapid identification of sperm recovery can allow some men to undergo a limited unilateral micro-TESE and avoid the need for complete testicular microdissection.
Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
K
K
Alrabeeah
OVO Fertility Clinic, Montreal, QC, Canada.
R
R
Doucet
OVO Fertility Clinic, Montreal, QC, Canada.
E
E
Boulet
OVO Fertility Clinic, Montreal, QC, Canada.
S
S
Phillips
Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
N
N
Al-Hathal
OVO Fertility Clinic, Montreal, QC, Canada.|Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
F
F
Bissonnette
OVO Fertility Clinic, Montreal, QC, Canada.|Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
I J
IJ
Kadoch
Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.|OVO Fertility Clinic, Montreal, QC, Canada.
A
A
Zini
D000328:Adult; D053713:Azoospermia / Q000601:surgery*; D004624:Embryo Transfer / Q000379:methods; D005260:Female; D005307:Fertilization in Vitro / Q000379:methods; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D042282:Microdissection / Q000379:methods; D011247:Pregnancy; D018873:Pregnancy Rate; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D055101:Semen Analysis / Q000379:methods*; D013076:Sperm Count; D020554:Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic / Q000379:methods; D053625:Sperm Retrieval; D013094:Spermatozoa / Q000502:physiology*; D013737:Testis / Q000601:surgery
azoospermia; intracytoplasmic sperm injection; male infertility; pregnancy; sperm retrieval; testicular sperm