Effects of age, testicular volume, reproductive hormone, and testicular biopsy on sperm retrieval rate of micro-TESE in NOA patients with AZFc deletion

Chenyao Deng,Jiaming Mao,Lianming Zhao,Defeng Liu,Haocheng Lin,Zhe Zhang,Yuzhuo Yang,Haitao Zhang,Kai Hong,Hui Jiang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1960052/v1
2022-01-01
Abstract:Abstract Objective: To investigate whether age, testicular volume, reproductive hormone, and preoperative diagnostic testicular biopsy affected sperm retrieval rate (SRR) in individuals with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA).Patients and methods: Retrospective analysis of clinical data of NOA patients with AZFc deletion who had microdissection testicular sperm extraction (micro-TESE). The effects of age, testicular volume, FSH, LH, T, and preoperative diagnostic testicular biopsy on SRR were compared cross-sectionally in this group of patients.Results: A total of 181 individuals had their sperm successfully collected and underwent micro-TESE, with an SRR of 67.4 %. The results of micro-TESE were separated into two groups: sperm acquisition and non-sperm acquisition, with no significant variations in age, testicular volume, FSH, LH, and T between the two groups. Binary logistic regression explored the absence of significant effects of age, testicular volume, FSH, LH, and T on sperm acquisition in patients undergoing micro-TESE. Based on whether or not a preoperative diagnostic testicular biopsy was conducted, the above parameters were compared between the two groups. Testicular volume was higher in the group with preoperative diagnostic testicular biopsy than in the group without preoperative diagnostic testicular biopsy, while FSH and T were lower. In the preoperative testicular diagnostic biopsy group, the sperm acquisition and non-acquired sperm groups had SRR of 90.1 % and 65.1 %, respectively, with the sperm acquisition group being significantly higher than the non-acquired sperm group.Conclusion: There is a high probability of successful sperm acquisition in the testis with micro-TESE. In this group of patients, age, testicular volume, FSH, LH, and T may have little bearing on the micro-TESE outcome. In patients whose preoperative diagnostic testicular biopsy revealed no sperm, the probability of obtaining sperm by micro-TESE remained high (65.1%), while negative preoperative diagnostic testicular biopsy results appeared to not influence SRR by micro-TESE.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?