Giovanni B La Sala, Barbara Valli, Sergio Leoni, Michela Pescarini, Ferdinando Martino, Alessia Nicoli
{"title":"327个ICSI周期的睾丸精子抽吸(TESA)。","authors":"Giovanni B La Sala, Barbara Valli, Sergio Leoni, Michela Pescarini, Ferdinando Martino, Alessia Nicoli","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the efficiency of testicular sperm recovery by testicular sperm aspiration (TESA) in an IVF program.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective Data Analysis.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The Center of Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Arcispedale S. Maria Nuova, Reggio Emilia, Italy.</p><p><strong>Patient(s): </strong>Couples undergoing TESA/ICSI for obstructive or nonobstructive azoospermia.</p><p><strong>Intervention(s): </strong>ESA/ICSI.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measure(s): </strong>Efficiency of testicular sperm recovery, fertilization rate, implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate.</p><p><strong>Result(s): </strong>Between March 1, 1997 and March 31, 2005, 327 cycles of TESA/ICSI were performed in couples in which the male had obstructive or nonobstructive azoospermia. The efficiency of testicular sperm recovery was 99.4% and 99.3%, fertilization rate 57.1% and 49.1%, implantation rate 5.7% and 6.2%, and the clinical pregnancy rate 12.9% and 15.4% in men with obstructive and nonobstructive infertility, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion(s): </strong>The efficiency of TESA is very high in both obstructive and nonobstructive azoospermia. Because TESA is less invasive than TESE, it should be considered a valuable alternative to TESE in IVF programs, especially in setting where resources are limited.</p>","PeriodicalId":50324,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Fertility and Womens Medicine","volume":"51 4","pages":"177-82"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testicular sperm aspiration (TESA) in 327 ICSI cycles.\",\"authors\":\"Giovanni B La Sala, Barbara Valli, Sergio Leoni, Michela Pescarini, Ferdinando Martino, Alessia Nicoli\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the efficiency of testicular sperm recovery by testicular sperm aspiration (TESA) in an IVF program.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective Data Analysis.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The Center of Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Arcispedale S. Maria Nuova, Reggio Emilia, Italy.</p><p><strong>Patient(s): </strong>Couples undergoing TESA/ICSI for obstructive or nonobstructive azoospermia.</p><p><strong>Intervention(s): </strong>ESA/ICSI.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measure(s): </strong>Efficiency of testicular sperm recovery, fertilization rate, implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate.</p><p><strong>Result(s): </strong>Between March 1, 1997 and March 31, 2005, 327 cycles of TESA/ICSI were performed in couples in which the male had obstructive or nonobstructive azoospermia. The efficiency of testicular sperm recovery was 99.4% and 99.3%, fertilization rate 57.1% and 49.1%, implantation rate 5.7% and 6.2%, and the clinical pregnancy rate 12.9% and 15.4% in men with obstructive and nonobstructive infertility, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion(s): </strong>The efficiency of TESA is very high in both obstructive and nonobstructive azoospermia. Because TESA is less invasive than TESE, it should be considered a valuable alternative to TESE in IVF programs, especially in setting where resources are limited.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50324,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Fertility and Womens Medicine\",\"volume\":\"51 4\",\"pages\":\"177-82\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Fertility and Womens Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Fertility and Womens Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:评价体外受精中睾丸精子抽吸法(TESA)恢复睾丸精子的效果。设计:回顾性数据分析。地点:意大利雷吉欧艾米利亚Arcispedale s . Maria Nuova妇产科生殖医学中心患者:接受TESA/ICSI治疗梗阻性或非梗阻性无精子症的夫妇干预:ESA/ICSI。主要观察指标:睾丸精子恢复效率、受精率、着床率和临床妊娠率。结果:1997年3月1日至2005年3月31日,对男性为梗阻性或非梗阻性无精子症的夫妇进行了327次TESA/ICSI。梗阻性和非梗阻性不孕男性睾丸精子恢复率分别为99.4%和99.3%,受精率分别为57.1%和49.1%,着床率分别为5.7%和6.2%,临床妊娠率分别为12.9%和15.4%。结论:TESA治疗梗阻性和非梗阻性无精子症的效率都很高。由于TESA的侵入性比TESE小,因此在体外受精项目中,尤其是在资源有限的情况下,它应该被认为是TESE的有价值的替代方案。
Testicular sperm aspiration (TESA) in 327 ICSI cycles.
Objective: To evaluate the efficiency of testicular sperm recovery by testicular sperm aspiration (TESA) in an IVF program.
Design: Retrospective Data Analysis.
Setting: The Center of Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Arcispedale S. Maria Nuova, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Patient(s): Couples undergoing TESA/ICSI for obstructive or nonobstructive azoospermia.
Intervention(s): ESA/ICSI.
Main outcome measure(s): Efficiency of testicular sperm recovery, fertilization rate, implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate.
Result(s): Between March 1, 1997 and March 31, 2005, 327 cycles of TESA/ICSI were performed in couples in which the male had obstructive or nonobstructive azoospermia. The efficiency of testicular sperm recovery was 99.4% and 99.3%, fertilization rate 57.1% and 49.1%, implantation rate 5.7% and 6.2%, and the clinical pregnancy rate 12.9% and 15.4% in men with obstructive and nonobstructive infertility, respectively.
Conclusion(s): The efficiency of TESA is very high in both obstructive and nonobstructive azoospermia. Because TESA is less invasive than TESE, it should be considered a valuable alternative to TESE in IVF programs, especially in setting where resources are limited.