Surgically Extracted Epididymal Sperm from Men with Obstructive Azoospermia Results in Similar In Vitro Fertilization/Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Outcomes Compared with Normal Ejaculated Sperm

Testicular fine-needle aspiration in infertile men with absolute non-obstructive azoospermia: A single-centre cohort study

BACKGROUND

The methodology of surgically extracted sperm cells in fertility treatments remains debated, mainly due to the lack of data evaluating its predictive value on treatment outcomes.

AIM

To gain insight into the effectiveness of testicular fine-needle aspiration (TEFNA) in a cohort of infertile men with absolute non-obstructive azoospermia and to examine whether the number of retrieved sperm cells affects the fertilisation rate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 89 infertile men, aged 26-47, meticulously diagnosed with non-obstructive azoospermia, participated in the study. All participants underwent TEFNA. The primary outcome measure was the TEFNA success rate in retrieving mature sperm. The secondary outcome measures included fertilisation rate, clinical pregnancy rates, and live births associated with the retrieved sperm.

RESULTS

Sperm cells were successfully retrieved from 40 out of 89 patients (45%) with no significant postoperative complications. Retrieval of up to ten sperm cells occurred in 11 procedures (25%); ten procedures (22.7%) resulted in producing dozens of sperm cells, and 100s to 1000s of sperm cells were obtained from the remainder of 23 procedures (52.3%). Patients whose TEFNA resulted in only a few sperm cells had a much lower fertilisation rate (16.6%) than the other two groups (40.1% and 47.2%, respectively, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

The utilisation of TEFNA for sperm extraction in men with non-obstructive azoospermia is a simple, fast-learning, effective, and safe treatment option. In cases where sperm retrieval was successful, the fertilisation rate was strongly related to the number of sperm cells obtained.

Microscopic Epididymal Sperm Aspiration (MESA) Should be Employed Over Testicular Sperm Extraction (TESE) Sperm Retrieval Surgery for Obstructive Azoospermia (OA)

INTRODUCTION

 Testicular sperm extraction (TESE) has been widely used as a sperm extraction surgery for azoospermia even for obstructive azoospermia (OA) because it does not require surgical skill. However, there are postoperative pain issues, and subsequent testicular atrophy and decreased testosterone levels may occur with TESE. This study examines the usefulness of microscopic epididymal sperm aspiration (MESA) for OA.

METHODS

 We studied 108 patients diagnosed with OA and treated with MESA at our institute between April 2004 and December 2021. The MESA was performed using a micropipette with a micropuncture technique under an operative microscope. When no sperm were present or motility was not observed, additional punctures to the epididymal tubule were performed.

RESULTS

 Motile sperm were recovered in all cases (108 cases). Of these, intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) using frozen-thawed sperm was performed in 101 cases and the normal fertilization rate was 76.2%. A total of 436 embryo transfer (ET) cycles were performed. The implantation rate per transfer cycle was 47.9%, the clinical pregnancy rate was 41.0%, and the live birth rate was 23.7%. The per-case live birth rate was 84.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

 MESA-ICSI has a very good fertilization rate, clinical pregnancy rate, and delivery rate. Furthermore, the patient's postoperative pain is less, the number of sperm collected is larger, the burden on the embryologist who processes the collected sperm is less, and ICSI can be easily attempted after frozen-thawed sperm. MESA rather than TESE should be employed for the OA subjects.

Modern surgical treatment of azoospermia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review noteworthy research from the last 2 years on surgical management of azoospermia.

RECENT FINDINGS

The recommended treatments for nonobstructive and obstructive azoospermia have not appreciably changed. However, recent level-1 evidence has reinforced superiority of micro-dissection testicular sperm extraction over sperm aspiration in men with nonobstructive azoospermia, and several studies have identified genetic and other clinical factors that may aid in selecting candidates for testicular sperm extraction. Machine learning technology has shown promise as a decision support system for patient selection prior to sperm retrieval as well a tool to aid in sperm identification from testis tissue.

SUMMARY

Most men with obstructive azoospermia who desire fertility can be offered either surgical reconstruction or sperm retrieval. For men with nonobstructive azoospermia, sperm retrieval with microdissection testicular sperm extraction remains the gold standard treatment. Uncovering more genetic causes of nonobstructive azoospermia may aid in properly counseling and selecting patients for microdissection testicular sperm extraction. Neural networks and deep learning may have a future role in patient selection for surgical sperm retrieval and postprocedural sperm identification.

The developmental miR-17-92 cluster and the Sfmbt2 miRNA cluster cannot rescue the abnormal embryonic development generated using obstructive epididymal environment-producing sperm in C57BL/6 J mice

BACKGROUND

Sperm, during epididymal transit, acquires microRNAs(miRNAs), which are crucial for embryonic development. However, whether sperm miRNAs influenced by an obstructive epididymal environment affect embryonic development remains unknown.

METHOD

The sham operation and vasectomy were performed in C57BL/6 J mice to create the control group (CON) and the obstructive epididymal environment group(OEE) group, respectively. The morphology of the testis and epididymis was observed using hematoxylin and eosin staining (HE staining) to establish the OEE mice model. The sperm quality test, intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), and epididymosomes fusion were employed to observe the effect of the obstructive epididymal environment on sperm and resultant embryonic development. The alteration of the sperm small RNA (sRNA) profile was analyzed by sRNA sequencing. RT-qPCR and DNA methylation were applied to observe the effect of obstructive epididymis on the expression of sperm miRNAs. The miRNAs microinjection was used to explore the impacts of sperm miRNAs on embryonic development.

RESULTS

We confirmed postoperative 8-week mice as the OEE mice model by examining the morphology of the testis and epididymis. In the OEE group, we observed that sperm quality degraded and the development potential of embryos was reduced, which can be saved by the normal epididymal environment. The sperm sRNA sequencing revealed that the expression of the developmental miR-17-92 cluster and the Sfmbt2 miRNA cluster was downregulated in the OEE group. The expression of these two miRNA clusters in epididymis was also downregulated and regulated by DNA methylation. However, the downregulation of either the miR-17-92 cluster or the Sfmbt2 miRNA cluster in normal zygotes did not impair embryonic development.

CONCLUSION

The obstructive epididymal environment influences sperm quality and resultant embryonic development, as well as the abundance of the developmental miR-17-92 cluster and the Sfmbt2 miRNA cluster in sperm, but these miRNA clusters are not the cause of abnormal embryonic development. It implies that epididymis is important in early embryonic development and may play a potential role in sperm epigenome.

Vasectomy reversal vs. sperm retrieval with in vitro fertilization: a contemporary, comparative analysis

OBJECTIVE

To explore the primary options available to men who desire fertility after a vasectomy.

DESIGN

Literature review.

SETTING

University of Miami Miller School of Medicine.

PATIENT(S)

Men with a previous vasectomy now seeking fertility.

INTERVENTION(S)

The two main options to achieve paternity for men following vasectomy include vasectomy reversal (VR) and surgical sperm retrieval with subsequent in vitro fertilization (IVF).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

We reviewed and compared the important considerations for men deciding between these 2 options, including: obstructive interval, female partner age, antisperm antibodies, male partner age, female infertility factors, and cost.

RESULT(S)

Both VR and IVF represent reasonable options for the couple seeking fertility after vasectomy. Specific circumstances may favor one modality over another, depending on obstructive interval, possible female fertility factors, female partner age, male partner age, and cost. In the absence of insurance coverage, VR is often more cost-effective than IVF. Alternatively, when a female factor may contribute to infertility in addition to vasectomy, IVF is often the better choice. Antisperm antibodies are unlikely to contribute to infertility following a successful VR.

CONCLUSION(S)

VR or surgical sperm retrieval with IVF are reasonable options for couples seeking children after vasectomy. Pregnancy rates for both options are overall similar, so prior to pursuing either option, a thorough discussion with a reproductive urologist who possesses microsurgical skills in VR and a reproductive endocrinologist with expertise in IVF is imperative. Making a final choice through shared decision-making while considering these points is ideal.

Differential Diagnosis of Azoospermia in Men with Infertility

The differential diagnosis between obstructive and nonobstructive azoospermia is the first step in the clinical management of azoospermic patients with infertility. It includes a detailed medical history and physical examination, semen analysis, hormonal assessment, genetic tests, and imaging studies. A testicular biopsy is reserved for the cases of doubt, mainly in patients whose history, physical examination, and endocrine analysis are inconclusive. The latter should be combined with sperm extraction for possible sperm cryopreservation. We present a detailed analysis on how to make the azoospermia differential diagnosis and discuss three clinical cases where the differential diagnosis was challenging. A coordinated effort involving reproductive urologists/andrologists, geneticists, pathologists, and embryologists will offer the best diagnostic path for men with azoospermia.