Microdissection testicular sperm extraction retrieval rates, adolescent varicocele repair, and evaluation of testosterone replacement therapy and prostate cancer are additional noteworthy topics in this field.
Joseph Alukal, MDMicrodissection testicular sperm extraction retrieval rates, adolescent varicocele repair, and evaluation of testosterone replacement therapy and prostate cancer are additional of noteworthy topics in this field. The Infertility/Andrology take home messages were presented by Joseph Alukal, MD, of New York University Urology Associates, New York.
Using the Subfertility and Assisted Reproduction Study database, co-linked to the Utah Population Database, investigators found a significantly higher risk of childhood cancer (Hodgkin's lymphoma, brain cancer, and acute lymphocytic leukemia) in siblings of men with oligozoospermia.
In an examination of vasectomy and risk of prostate cancer in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Trial, no increased risk of prostate cancer with prior vasectomy was found in the screening arm, but an increased risk was observed (adjusted HR: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.03-1.20) in the usual care arm. The authors said the association was likely related to increased detection of prostate cancer based on patterns of care rather than a biologic effect of vasectomy.
In a retrospective review of 230 patients undergoing microdissection testicular sperm extraction (microTESE) for nonobstructive azoospermia, the retrieval rate was 45.7%. Of 83 patients who advanced to intracytoplasmic sperm injection, the pregnancy rate was 43.8%, with a live birth rate of 17.3%. There was no significant difference in pregnancy or live birth rates between use of fresh or frozen sperm.
In men with nonobstructive azoospermia and a history of cryptorchidism, sperm was retrieved in 62% of cases of microTESE, with a pregnancy rate of 47%. Serum follicle-stimulating hormone level and testis size were not predictive of retrieval.
In a study of adolescent varicocele repair, the paternity rate was 77.3% in the repair group versus 48.4% in control group (p<.005), with statistically significant differences in improvement of semen parameters.
Subscribe to Urology Times to get monthly news from the leading news source for urologists.