Hammam Mandourah, Mohammad Alghafees, Hamed Alali, Shaheed Alsuhaibani, Eyad Gutub, Lama Aldosari, Turki Alhumaid, Said Kattan, Naif Alhathal
{"title":"Comparison of sperm retrieval rate between superficial and deep dissection during microscopic testicular sperm extraction.","authors":"Hammam Mandourah, Mohammad Alghafees, Hamed Alali, Shaheed Alsuhaibani, Eyad Gutub, Lama Aldosari, Turki Alhumaid, Said Kattan, Naif Alhathal","doi":"10.4103/ua.ua_22_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of the study was to compare the outcome of microscopic testicular sperm extraction (micro-TESE) between superficial and deep dissection on the same testicle in terms of sperm retrieval rate (SRR).</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>In a retrospective study from June 2019 to October 2021, 44 patients with nonobstructive azoospermia who underwent micro-TESE with positive results (mature sperm identified) were included. Eight patients were excluded from the study due to deficient documentation on superficial and deep dissection. A total of 36 patients were included; 60 testicles were examined for superficial and deep biopsies. Testicular histopathology was performed in all patients, and a hormonal evaluation was obtained before the micro-TESE attempt.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-six patients and 60 testicles were included in the study. Of them, 47 (78.3%) testicles had positive results. Superficial TESE was positive in 38 (63.3%) testicles, and deep TESE was successful in 45 (75.0%) testicles. An improvement of 13.9% in the SRR was observed, following deep dissection. However, there was no statistically significant difference (<i>P</i> = 0.166). Rates of positive sperm retrieval (from any side) did not differ significantly based on patients' age, microdissection testicular sperm extraction sides, and hormonal concentrations; these differences were not apparent after superficial or deep TESE.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The presented findings suggest that although successful SRRs of deep TESE were higher than that of its superficial counterpart, there was no significant statistical difference. A larger body of evidence is needed to provide a higher grade of recommendation.</p>","PeriodicalId":23633,"journal":{"name":"Urology Annals","volume":"16 1","pages":"108-112"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10896327/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urology Annals","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ua.ua_22_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of the study was to compare the outcome of microscopic testicular sperm extraction (micro-TESE) between superficial and deep dissection on the same testicle in terms of sperm retrieval rate (SRR).
Patients and methods: In a retrospective study from June 2019 to October 2021, 44 patients with nonobstructive azoospermia who underwent micro-TESE with positive results (mature sperm identified) were included. Eight patients were excluded from the study due to deficient documentation on superficial and deep dissection. A total of 36 patients were included; 60 testicles were examined for superficial and deep biopsies. Testicular histopathology was performed in all patients, and a hormonal evaluation was obtained before the micro-TESE attempt.
Results: Thirty-six patients and 60 testicles were included in the study. Of them, 47 (78.3%) testicles had positive results. Superficial TESE was positive in 38 (63.3%) testicles, and deep TESE was successful in 45 (75.0%) testicles. An improvement of 13.9% in the SRR was observed, following deep dissection. However, there was no statistically significant difference (P = 0.166). Rates of positive sperm retrieval (from any side) did not differ significantly based on patients' age, microdissection testicular sperm extraction sides, and hormonal concentrations; these differences were not apparent after superficial or deep TESE.
Conclusion: The presented findings suggest that although successful SRRs of deep TESE were higher than that of its superficial counterpart, there was no significant statistical difference. A larger body of evidence is needed to provide a higher grade of recommendation.