Beyond the clinical classification of azoospermia: opinion.

There is an ongoing debate regarding the appropriate classification of azoospermia. This manuscript reviews the rationale for the current classification of azoospermia and how to effect a change if there is a need to do so. The current classification of azoospermia into obstructive and non-obstructive is because azoospermia due to ejaculatory duct dysfunction and hypogonadotrophism are extremely rare. Though the use of clinical protocols (defective spermatogenesis, genital tract obstruction, ejaculatory duct dysfunction, hypogonadotrophism or pre-testicular, testicular and post-testicular) may be useful in selecting patients for appropriate treatment, no study has shown that they provide a better method of classification of azoospermia than the current approach. There is increasing evidence of a genetic basis of male infertility as well as the evidence that men's fertility potential may be classified genetically. Moreover, genetic disorders may be transmitted to the offspring and their presence in infertile couples may affect treatment outcome. It is therefore useful to explore a genetic classification of azoospermia.

Establishment of predictive variables associated with testicular sperm retrieval in men with non-obstructive azoospermia.

Although testicular biopsy for sperm extraction is a procedure with a potential for complications, sperm retrieval is successful in 30-70% of patients with non-obstructive azoospermia. In order to predict the probability of retrieving at least one testicular spermatozoon we conducted a prospective study of a set of variables in 40 patients with non-obstructive azoospermia. Using the receiver operating characteristic curves, we determined the probability estimates of testicular volume, plasma follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) concentration, Johnsen score and visualization of testicular spermatids in discriminating between patients with successful and failed testicular sperm extraction. Visualization of testicular spermatids provided the best estimate of success of testicular sperm extraction. Of the factors studied using logistic-regression analysis (age, maternal and paternal age at birth, body mass index, luteinizing hormone, testosterone, FSH, testicular volume, the presence of testicular spermatids and Johnsen score), only the presence of spermatids and Johnsen score were independent variables able to predict the success of testicular sperm extraction. The visualization of the presence of spermatids gave a correct prediction of 77% and Johnsen score of 71%. The diagnostic model derived from these independent predictors when validated in 40 patients using the Jackknife technique gave a correct overall prediction of 87%. The probability of successful testicular sperm extraction in patients with non-obstructive azoospermia could be objectively predicted on the basis of simple histopathological criteria represented by the visualization of testicular spermatids and Johnsen score.

Morbidity and cost-effectiveness analysis of outpatient analgesia versus general anaesthesia for testicular sperm extraction in men with azoospermia due to defects in spermatogenesis.

The outcome and costs of testicular sperm extraction under outpatient local analgesia or general anaesthesia were compared in men with non-obstructive azoospermia. Nineteen consecutive patients were allocated to receive general anaesthesia, while the subsequent 21 consecutive patients received outpatient analgesia in the form of i.v. midazolam sedation, lignocaine spray, scrotal infiltration with local anaesthetic and spermatic cord block. Blood pressure, pulse rate and respiratory rate were determined. Sedation and testicular pain were assessed by subjective scoring. Both groups showed haemodynamic stability with little alteration in blood pressure, pulse rate and oxygen saturation. Toxic symptoms of local anaesthetic were not encountered in the outpatient group. No relationship was found between testicular size and the duration of the operation. The median postoperative pain intensity, sedation scores and analgesic requirements were significantly less in the outpatient group (P < 0.05). These advantages led to a shorter recovery time (P < 0.0001), 3-fold cheaper care and greater patient satisfaction (P < 0.0001) in the outpatient group.

Correlation of testicular pathology and sperm extraction in azoospermic men with ejaculated spermatids detected by immunofluorescent localization.

Limiting testicular biopsy for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) to those with a high chance of having testicular spermatozoa has not been possible because of the poor predictive value of current clinical and laboratory methods. In order to predict testicular pathology and sperm extraction, we characterised the semen of 28 men with azoospermia due to gonadal failure in terms of the presence of spermatids using an immunological method. The results were compared with the assessment of testicular biopsies by histology and the extraction of spermatozoa into culture medium. Washed cellular elements in the ejaculate were smeared on microscope slides and fixed in 100% methanol, before incubation with acrosome-specific monoclonal antibody (18.6), fluorescein isothiocyanate-labelled anti-mouse goat IgG, and examination by epifluorescent microscopy. Semen from men with oligozoospermia and obstructive azoospermia served as positive and negative controls, respectively. Twelve patients who had positive immunofluorescence (one or more spermatids present) had spermatozoa retrieved from their testes (five hypospermatogenesis, seven focal spermatogenesis), and 16 patients with negative immunofluorescence (spermatids absent) had apparent Sertoli cell-only syndrome (12) or maturation arrest histological pattern (four). However, four patients with apparent Sertoli cell-only syndrome had testicular spermatozoa present after extraction from the biopsy. Plasma follicle stimulating hormone concentration and testicular volume did not predict retrieval of seminal spermatids or testicular spermatozoa. We conclude that the immunofluorescent localization of one or more spermatids in the ejaculate can be used to predict the likelihood of obtaining testicular spermatozoa for ICSI. However, in some patients with Sertoli cell-only syndrome, spermatozoa could still be recovered in the absence of apparent seminal spermatids.

Correlation of testicular sperm extraction with morphological, biophysical and endocrine profiles in men with azoospermia due to primary gonadal failure.

To identify the predictive factors for testicular sperm extraction (TESE) and to understand the pathology associated with TESE, we carried out a prospective study in 40 consecutive men with azoospermia due to primary gonadal failure. The main outcome measure was the retrieval of at least one testicular spermatozoon. Endocrine and biophysical profiles, testicular histology, Johnsen score and testicular spermatids were used as predictors of sperm extraction. Spermatogenesis was quantified with the Johnsen score. A variable pattern of spermatogenesis was common, being present in 20 (50%) patients. Visualisation of testicular spermatids on testicular histology showed a strong association with TESE (P < 0.0001). Statistically significant differences were detected in plasma follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and testicular volume between patients who had hypospermatogenesis and Sertoli cell-only or maturation arrest. There were no significant differences in Johnsen score, biophysical and endocrine profiles between the groups with successful and failed TESE. However, a statistically significant trend occurred with changes in histological pattern [chi2 for trend, P = 0.001; Pearson's coefficient (r) = 0.6], Johnsen score (P = 0.022; r = 0.5), testicular volume (P = 0.01; r = 0.5) and plasma FSH concentrations (P = 0.044; r = 0.4), albeit to a limited degree. Difference in the interpretation of histological patterns with different assessors was observed. The type of occupation or risk factors for azoospermia showed no association with testicular pathology or TESE. Variable histological patterns in different tubules in the same individual may explain the poor correlation of TESE with endocrine and biophysical profiles, Johnsen score and histological pattern. Differences in the amount of tissue used for TESE and histopathology, and misinterpretation of testicular histology rather than failure to quantify spermatogenesis may explain the poor correlation between histological patterns and TESE. Testicular spermatids predicted TESE. However, considerable overlap in values means that no single variable can provide a perfect discrimination between the groups with successful and failed TESE.

A prospective study of multiple needle biopsies versus a single open biopsy for testicular sperm extraction in men with non-obstructive azoospermia.

Little is known about the efficacy and the factors affecting the outcome of fine needle aspiration biopsy of the testis for sperm retrieval in azoospermic men with defective spermatogenesis. A prospective study was designed to compare the efficacy of needle and open (window) testicular biopsies for testicular epididymal sperm extraction (TESE) in 35 consecutive men with azoospermia due to defective spermatogenesis undergoing testicular biopsy for intracytoplasmic injection of oocytes. Each of the consecutive 35 patients underwent TESE using a 19 gauge butterfly needle followed by a window (1-1.5 cm-sized incision) testicular biopsy in the same procedure. The extraction of spermatozoa into culture medium was compared with the assessment of testicular biopsies by histology, the mode of biopsy (needle or open biopsy) and the amount of tissue retrieved by either method. Testicular spermatozoa were retrieved in 22 (63%) who had an open testicular biopsy compared with five (14%) patients who had multiple needle biopsies, respectively; the difference was statistically significant. Open testicular biopsy retrieves more testicular tissue than needle biopsy. Needle testicular biopsy retrieved testicular spermatozoa in 50% of those with hypospermatogenesis, 10% with focal spermatogenesis and in no patients with maturation arrest or Sertoli cell-only pattern. In contrast, sperm retrieval was successful in 100%, 90% and 66% of those with respective histologies using open testicular biopsy. Other than bruising, for which they required no analgesia, none of the patients suffered any obvious complications associated with traditional testicular biopsy. We conclude that open testicular biopsy is more effective than needle biopsy for the retrieval of testicular spermatozoa in azoospermic men with defective spermatogenesis. The difference observed may be related to the amount of testicular tissue retrieved and to the influence of testicular histology.