Book contents
- Manual of Sperm Retrieval and Preparation in Human Assisted Reproduction
- Cambridge Laboratory Manuals in Assisted Reproductive Technology
- Manual of Sperm Retrieval and Preparation in Human Assisted Reproduction
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Editor Biographies
- Preface
- Part I Introduction
- Chapter 1 Anatomy and Physiology of the Male Reproductive System
- Chapter 2 Evaluation of Candidates for Sperm Retrieval
- Chapter 3 Testicular Histopathology and the Role of Testis Biopsy
- Part II Sperm Retrieval
- Part III Laboratory Handling of Retrieved Sperm
- Index
- References
Chapter 3 - Testicular Histopathology and the Role of Testis Biopsy
from Part I - Introduction
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 April 2021
Book contents
- Manual of Sperm Retrieval and Preparation in Human Assisted Reproduction
- Cambridge Laboratory Manuals in Assisted Reproductive Technology
- Manual of Sperm Retrieval and Preparation in Human Assisted Reproduction
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Editor Biographies
- Preface
- Part I Introduction
- Chapter 1 Anatomy and Physiology of the Male Reproductive System
- Chapter 2 Evaluation of Candidates for Sperm Retrieval
- Chapter 3 Testicular Histopathology and the Role of Testis Biopsy
- Part II Sperm Retrieval
- Part III Laboratory Handling of Retrieved Sperm
- Index
- References
Summary
Testicular histopathology has been found to be the most reliable predictive factor of successful sperm retrieval in nonobstructive azoospermia patients. Some studies have proposed performing a diagnostic biopsy before assisted reproductive technology. However, its application in clinical practice has been debated due to some criticisms, including its cost-ineffective nature. Another important advantage of histopathology is the revealing of germ cell neoplasia in situ, which occurs in 1–3 percent of infertile patients. Testicular histopathology also offers important information in cases of failed sperm retrieval. When areas of active spermatogenesis are found, the histological pattern could guide the clinician in choosing the more suitable therapeutic option.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Nicopoullos, JD, Gilling-Smith, C, Almeida, PA, et al. Use of surgical sperm retrieval in azoospermic men: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2004;82:691–701.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Esteves, SC, Myaoka, R, Orosz, JE, Agarwal, A. An update on sperm retrieval techniques for azoospermic males. Clinics 2013;68:99–110.Google Scholar
Salehi, P, Derakhshan-Horeh, M, Nadeali, Z, et al. Factors influencing sperm retrieval following testicular sperm extraction in nonobstructive azoospermia patients. Clin Exp Reprod Med 2017;44(1):22–27.Google Scholar
Schlegel, PN. Causes of a azoospermia and their management. Reprod Fertil Dev 2004;16:561–572.Google Scholar
Tournaye, H, Verheyen, G, Nagy, P, et al. Are there any predictive factors for successful testicular sperm recovery in azoospermic patients? Hum Reprod 1997;12:80–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cito, G, Coccia, ME, Picone, R, et al. Novel method of histopathological analysis after testicular sperm extraction in patients with nonobstructive and obstructive azoospermia. Clin Exp Reprod Med 2018;45(4):170–176.Google Scholar
Caroppo, E, Colpi, EM, Gazzano, G, et al. Testicular histology may predict the successful sperm retrieval in patients with non-obstructive azoospermia undergoing conventional TESE: a diagnostic accuracy study. J Assist Reprod Genet 2017;34(1):149–154.Google Scholar
Martin-du-Pan, RC, Bischof, P. Increased follicle stimulating hormone in infertile men: is increased plasma FSH always due to damaged germinal epithelium? Hum Reprod 1995;10:1940–1945.Google Scholar
Tuttelmann, F, Laan, M, Grigorova, M, et al. Combined effects of the variants FSHB-211G>T and FSHR 2039A>G on male reproductive parameters. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2012;97:3639–3647.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tsujimura, A, Matsumiya, K, Miyagawa, Y, et al. Prediction of successful outcome of microdissection testicular sperm extraction in men with idiopathic nonobstructive azoospermia. J Urol 2004;172:1944–1947.Google Scholar
Colpi, GM, Colpi, EM, Piediferro, G, et al. Microsurgical TESE versus conventional TESE for ICSI in non-obstructive azoospermia: a randomized controlled study. Reprod Biomed Online 2009;18:315–319.Google Scholar
Sousa, M, Cremades, N, Silva, J, et al. Predictive value of testicular histology in secretory azoospermic subgroups and clinical outcome after microinjection of fresh and frozen-thawed sperm and spermatids. Hum Reprod 2002;17:1800–1810.Google Scholar
Cissen, M, Meijerink, AM, D’Hauwers, KW, et al. Prediction model for obtaining spermatozoa with testicular sperm extraction in men with non-obstructive azoospermia. Hum Reprod 2016;31(9):1934–1941.Google Scholar
Schlegel, PN, Su, LM. Physiological consequences of testicular sperm extraction. Hum Reprod 1997;12:1688–1692.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plas, E, Riedl, CR, Engelhardt, PF, Mühlbauer, H, Pflüger, H. Unilateral or bilateral testicular biopsy in the era of intracytoplasmic sperm injection. J Urol 1999;162:2010–2013.Google Scholar
Colpi, GM, Pozza, D. Diagnosing Male Infertility: New Possibilities and Limits, Karger, Basel, 1992.Google Scholar
Cito, G, Coccia, ME, Dabizzi, S, et al. Relevance of testicular histopathology on prediction of sperm retrieval rates in case of non-obstructive and obstructive azoospermia. Urologia 2018;85(2):60–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shoshany, O, Shtabholtz, Y, Schreter, E, et al. Predictors of spermatogenesis in radical orchiectomy specimen and potential implications for patients with testicular cancer. Fertil Steril 2016;106(1):70–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Banz-Jansen, C, Nikorowitsch, C, Drechsler, T, et al. Incidence of testicular malignancies and correlation to risk factors in a TESE population of subfertile men. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2012;285(1):247–253.Google Scholar