The timing of micro-TESE: what is the ideal age for male and female partner to bring a child to home?

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the results of microsurgical testicular sperm extraction (micro-TESE) and investigate the potential factors that may affect the successful sperm retrieval and timing of micro-TESE. METHODS: A total of 56 patients with nonobstructive azoospermia (NOA) who underwent micro-TESE procedure between January 2017 and December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The patient age, marriage duration, infertility duration, smoking, chronic illness, varicocele status, previous scrotal surgeries, and the presence of genetic disease were noted by an urologist for all patients. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 33.28±4.4 (22-44) years. Our total sperm-retrieval rate was 55.4% (n:31). Sixteen (28.6%) pregnancies were achieved and 15 (26.8%) healthy live births could be managed. Only the marriage duration (p=0.016) and infertility duration (p=0.015) were detected to be the significant factors to manage successful sperm retrieval. Men with NOA younger than 35.2 years and having a female partner younger than 36.9 years seemed to have the best chance to have a living healthy baby. CONCLUSIONS: The fertility decreased by both male and female age and for men with NOA. The early visit to doctor seemed to have positive effect.

Using porcine acellular collagen matrix (Pelvicol®) in bladder augmentation: experimental study

PURPOSE: Evaluate the rabbit augmented bladder with Pelvicolomicron. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty New Zealand rabbits were divided into 4 groups. Bladder augmentation was performed using a 10 x 10 mm sized porcine acellular collagen matrix. The material was placed on the dome of the bladder wall as a patch with 5-0 polyglycolic sutures. The bladder was resected on the 7th, 14th day, 30th and 90th days, and processed for histological analysis. RESULTS: No stone formation was found in the first, second and fourth weeks. In the first week, there was inflammatory appearance and roughness in the reconstructed area when compared to other sites on the bladder wall. The material could not be seen in some bladders because of acute inflammatory reaction. The normal bladder epithelium was found on the part of the bladder wall that follows the surface of the eroded material. In the second week, edema was observed through the bladder wall. Perivesical fat tissue increased and it was not easy to distinguish it from the surrounding area. In the fourth week, the bladder wall was thickened and there was a sensation of hardness present. The inner and outer surface of the material was darker than in the other bladders. In the third month, there was no inflammatory reaction; however, there was micro calcification and irregular detrusor regeneration. CONCLUSIONS: Pelvicolomicron cannot be suitable material for bladder augmentation because of the resultant micro calcification, thickening of the bladder wall and irregular development of detrusor regeneration.