Onco-TESE (Testicular Sperm Extraction): Insights from a Tertiary Center and Comprehensive Literature Analysis

Fertility Preservation in People With Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To provide updated fertility preservation (FP) recommendations for people with cancer.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary Expert Panel convened and updated the systematic review.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-six studies comprise the evidence base.

RECOMMENDATIONS

People with cancer should be evaluated for and counseled about reproductive risks at diagnosis and during survivorship. Patients interested in or uncertain about FP should be referred to reproductive specialists. FP approaches should be discussed before cancer-directed therapy. Sperm cryopreservation should be offered to males before cancer-directed treatment, with testicular sperm extraction if unable to provide semen samples. Testicular tissue cryopreservation in prepubertal males is experimental and should be offered only in a clinical trial. Males should be advised of potentially higher genetic damage risks in sperm collected soon after cancer-directed therapy initiation and completion. For females, established FP methods should be offered, including embryo, oocyte, and ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC), ovarian transposition, and conservative gynecologic surgery. In vitro maturation of oocytes may be offered as an emerging method. Post-treatment FP may be offered to people who did not undergo pretreatment FP or cryopreserve enough oocytes or embryos. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) should not be used in place of established FP methods but may be offered as an adjunct to females with breast cancer. For patients with oncologic emergencies requiring urgent oncologic therapy, GnRHa may be offered for menstrual suppression. Established FP methods in children who have begun puberty should be offered with patient assent and parent/guardian consent. The only established method for prepubertal females is OTC. Oncology teams should ensure prompt access to a multidisciplinary FP team. Clinicians should advocate for comprehensive FP services coverage and help patients access benefits.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/survivorship-guidelines.

Preoperative semen quality is superior to the quality shortly after orchiectomy in patients with testicular germ cell tumour - a retrospective study from two centres in Germany

BACKGROUND

Sperm cryopreservation in patients with testicular germ cell tumours (GCTs) is traditionally performed after orchiectomy. But, some evidence suggests preoperative semen quality to be superior. We aimed to clarify the optimal time-point of cryopreservation.In a retrospective study, semen quality of 163 patients analysed preoperatively was compared with 242 patients analysed shortly after orchiectomy. Descriptive statistical methods with standard tests for comparisons were employed along with stratified analyses regarding the influence of clinical factors.

RESULTS

All major semen parameters were significantly better in the preoperative group: median ejaculate volume (3 ml preoperatively vs. 2 ml postoperatively); median total sperm count (56.9 x106vs.13 x 106), median progressive motility (40% vs. 25%); azoospermia (4.9% vs. 14.9%). Stratified analysis of subgroups did not reveal significant impact of particular clinical factors on the superiority of preoperative semen quality. Limitations relate to the design of group comparison rather than intraindividual longitudinal comparisons and to selective inclusion of patients opting for cryopreservation.

CONCLUSIONS

In GCT patients, semen quality before orchiectomy is significantly superior to that found immediately after surgery. This superiority encompasses all major semen quality parameters. Of particular note is a threefold increase of azoospermia postoperatively. GCT patients are best advised to have cryopreservation performed before orchiectomy.

Preliminary Results of Microsurgical Sperm Retrieval in Azoospermic Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Operating Microscope vs. Surgical Loupes

Objectives: To compare surgical outcomes and sperm retrieval rates (SRRs) between conventional microsurgical-assisted testicular sperm extraction (m-TeSE-Group A) and testicular sperm extraction performed with surgical loupes (l-TeSE-Group B) in adult males with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA). Methods: A multicentric prospective randomized trial (ethics committee no. 202/2022) in accordance with the CONSORT guidelines was conducted from March 2022 to April 2024. Adult males with NOA without genetic alterations who signed the informed consent were enrolled. SRRs, intra- and postoperative complications (according to the Clavien-Dindo classification), and hormonal profile changes were considered as outcomes during the follow-up period. Results: A total of 42 NOA patients were enrolled. The median age was 35 years (IQR: 33-49). The preoperative median FSH was 16.5 mIU/mL (IQR: 11.6-22.5) and the total testosterone was 4.6 (3.5-5.6). Overall, the SRR was 22.6%, with sperm retrieved from 19 testes. Histopathological findings reported Sertoli cell-only syndrome (SCOS) in 46.4% (39 cases), hypospermatogenesis in 26.2%, and germ cell arrest in 26.2% of the patients. No intraoperative complications were recorded. The postoperative complications were minimal (Clavien-Dindo grade I), but no significant differences were recorded in-between the two surgical approaches. Considering the operative time of the testicular exploration alone, Group B seemed to be faster than the m-TeSE, with a median time saving of 8 min (p < 0.01). Conclusion: The use of surgical loupes was safe and comparable with m-TeSE in terms of the SRRs and complication rates. L-TeSE offered a reduction in the operative time compared with m-TeSE.

The Outcomes of Onco-Testis Sperm Extraction at the Time of Radical Orchiectomy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate outcomes of onco-testis sperm extraction (TESE) and to define potential predictors of successful surgical sperm retrieval (SSR).

METHODS

For this study, we examined all men (i) diagnosed with a testicular mass, (ii) who had azoospermia, and (iii) who underwent a radical orchiectomy and onco-TESE. Our institutional database of testicular cancer (TCA) patients was reviewed. Demographics, baseline endocrine and oncological characteristics, and treatments received were recorded. The onco-TESE Technique was performed at the time of radical orchiectomy before the specimen was sent for formal histopathological assessment. Onco-TESE was considered successful if viable sperm was found. Logistic regression assessments were performed to evaluate predictors of successful onco-TESE.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight men with a median age of 35 were included in the analysis. Median baseline total testosterone, LH, and FSH levels were 419ng/dL, 10.9mU/mL, and 27mU/mL, respectively. The median pre-TESE testicular volume was 11 mL. Of men who underwent radical orchiectomy, 58% had unilateral tumors at the time of the procedure. 42% had bilateral tumors, which were synchronous in 25%, and asynchronous tumors in 75%. Pathologically, 76% had germ cell tumor (83% had pure seminoma, and 17% had mixed germ cell tumor). At onco-TESE, 24% of the patients had successful SSR. No variables had a statistically significant association with successful SSR.

CONCLUSION

Onco-TESE represents a useful option for testis cancer patients who wish for future paternity, with a quarter of such patients having sperm found.

Fertility preservation in male adolescents with cancer (2011-2020): A retrospective study in China

BACKGROUND

According to the studies, more than 80% of pediatric patients with cancer can achieve a survival rate greater than 5 years; however, long-term chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy may seriously affect their reproductive ability. Fertility preservation in adolescents with cancer in China was initiated late, and related research is lacking. Analyze data to understand the current situation and implement measures to improve current practices.

METHODS

From 2011 to 2020, data on 275 male adolescents with cancer whose age ranged from 0 to 19 years old were collected from 16 human sperm banks for this retrospective study. Methods include comparing the basic situation of male adolescents with cancer, the distribution of cancer types, and semen quality to analyze the status of fertility preservation.

RESULTS

The mean age was 17.39 ± 1.46 years, with 13 cases (4.7%) aged 13-14 years and 262 cases (95.3%) aged 15-19 years. Basic diagnoses included leukemia (55 patients), lymphomas (76), germ cell and gonadal tumors (65), epithelial tumors (37), soft tissue sarcomas (14), osteosarcoma (7), brain tumors (5), and other cancers (16). There are differences in tumor types in different age stages and regions. The tumor type often affects semen quality, while age affects semen volume. Significant differences were found in sperm concentration and progressive motility before and after treatment (p < 0.001). Moreover, 90.5% of patients had sperm in their semen and sperm were frozen successfully in 244 patients (88.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

The aim of this study is to raise awareness of fertility preservation in male adolescents with cancer, to advocate for fertility preservation prior to gonadotoxic therapy or other procedures that may impair future fertility, and to improve the fertility status of future patients.

Case report: remedial microdissection testicular sperm extraction after onco-microdissection testicular sperm extraction failure

BACKGROUND

Testicular cancer (TC) mostly occurs in men aged 14 to 44. Studies have shown that TC seriously damages male fertility, and 6% to 24% of patients with TC were even found to suffer from azoospermia when they are diagnosed. At present, some studies have pointed out that onco-microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) can extract sperm from tumor testicles. However, there are almost no reports on remedial measures after onco-mTESE failure. Given the valuable opportunity for fertility preservation in patients with TC and azoospermia, it is necessary to provide effective remedial methods for patients with failed onco-mTESE.

METHODS

Two young men, who were diagnosed with TC and also found to have azoospermia, tried onco-mTESE while undergoing radical orchiectomy for fertility preservation. However, sperm extraction failed in both patients. Subsequently, the isolated testicular tissue of the patient in case 1 suffered from TC again, and the patient in case 2 was scheduled to receive multiple cycles of gonadotoxic chemotherapy. Because both had a plan to have a birth in the future, we performed remedial mTESE.

RESULTS

Sperm was successfully extracted from both patients. The patient recovered well, without complications. The patient couple in case 1 underwent 1 intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycle but did not achieve clinical pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

There is still an opportunity to extract sperm successfully using onco-mTESE, despite the difficulty of fertility preservation in TC patients with azoospermia. If sperm extraction from the tumor testis fails, implementing remedial mTESE as early as possible would likely preserve the last chance of fertility for these patients.