The epidemiology and etiology of azoospermia

The misconception that infertility is typically associated with the female is commonly faced in the management of infertile men. It is uncommon for a patient to present for an infertility evaluation with an abnormal semen analysis report before an extensive female partner workup has been performed. Additionally, a man is usually considered fertile based only on seminal parameters without a physical exam. This behavior may lead to a delay in both the exact diagnosis and in possible specific infertility treatment. Moreover, male factor infertility can result from an underlying medical condition that is often treatable but could possibly be life-threatening. The responsibility of male factor in couple's infertility has been exponentially rising in recent years due to a comprehensive evaluation of reproductive male function and improved diagnostic tools. Despite this improvement in diagnosis, azoospermia is always the most challenging topic associated with infertility treatment. Several conditions that interfere with spermatogenesis and reduce sperm production and quality can lead to azoospermia. Azoospermia may also occur because of a reproductive tract obstruction. Optimal management of patients with azoospermia requires a full understanding of the disease etiology. This review will discuss in detail the epidemiology and etiology of azoospermia. A thorough literature survey was performed using the Medline, EMBASE, BIOSIS, and Cochrane databases. We restricted the survey to clinical publications that were relevant to male infertility and azoospermia. Many of the recommendations included are not based on controlled studies.

Medical management of non-obstructive azoospermia

Non-obstructive azoospermia is diagnosed in approximately 10% of infertile men. It represents a failure of spermatogenesis within the testis and, from a management standpoint, is due to either a lack of appropriate stimulation by gonadotropins or an intrinsic testicular impairment. The former category of patients has hypogonadotropic hypogonadism and benefits from specific hormonal therapy. These men show a remarkable recovery of spermatogenic function with exogenously administered gonadotropins or gonadotropin-releasing hormone. This category of patients also includes some individuals whose spermatogenic potential has been suppressed by excess androgens or steroids, and they also benefit from medical management. The other, larger category of non-obstructive azoospermia consists of men with an intrinsic testicular impairment where empirical medical therapy yields little benefit. The primary role of medical management in these men is to improve the quantity and quality of sperm retrieved from their testis for in vitro fertilization. Gonadotropins and aromatase inhibitors show promise in achieving this end point.

Reproductive outcomes, including neonatal data, following sperm injection in men with obstructive and nonobstructive azoospermia: case series and systematic review

We compared pregnancy outcomes following intracytoplasmic sperm injection for the treatment of male infertility according to the type of azoospermia. First, we analyzed our data from 370 couples who underwent intracytoplasmic sperm injection using sperm from men with obstructive azoospermia and nonobstructive azoospermia, and the outcomes were compared to a group of 465 non-azoospermic infertile males. Then, we performed a systematic review of the published data on pregnancy and neonatal outcomes of children born after sperm injection using sperm from men with obstructive and nonobstructive azoospermia. Live birth rates were significantly lower in the nonobstructive azoospermia group (21.4%) compared with the obstructive azoospermia (37.5%) and ejaculated sperm (32.3%) groups. A total of 326 live births resulted in 427 babies born. Differences were not observed between the groups in gestational age, preterm birth, birth weight and low birth weight, although we noted a tendency towards poorer neonatal outcomes in the azoospermia categories. The overall perinatal death and malformation rates were 2.8% and 1.6%, respectively, and the results did not differ between the groups. We identified 20 published studies that directly compared pregnancy outcomes between obstructive azoospermia and nonobstructive azoospermia. Most of these studies were not designed to detect differences in live birth rates and had lower power to detect differences in less frequent outcomes, and the reporting of neonatal outcomes was unusual. The included studies reported either a decrease or no difference in pregnancy outcomes with intracytoplasmic sperm injection in cases of nonobstructive azoospermia and obstructive azoospermia. In general, no major differences were noted in short-term neonatal outcomes and congenital malformation rates between children from fathers with nonobstructive azoospermia and obstructive azoospermia.

An update on the clinical assessment of the infertile male

Male infertility is directly or indirectly responsible for 60 percent of cases involving reproductive-age couples with fertility-related issues. Nevertheless, the evaluation of male infertility is often underestimated or postponed. A coordinated evaluation of the infertile male using standardized procedures improves both diagnostic precision and the results of subsequent management in terms of effectiveness, risk and costs. Recent advances in assisted reproductive techniques (ART) have made it possible to identify and overcome previously untreatable causes of male infertility. To properly utilize the available techniques and improve clinical results, it is of the utmost importance that patients are adequately diagnosed and evaluated. Ideally, this initial assessment should also be affordable and accessible. We describe the main aspects of male infertility evaluation in a practical manner to provide information on the judicious use of available diagnostic tools and to better determine the etiology of the most adequate treatment for the existing condition.