Are hormone measurements and ultrasounds really predictors of sperm retrieval in testicular sperm extraction? A case report and literature review.

Azoospermia can be diagnosed in about 10%-15% of the infertile male population. To overcome the problem of failure to produce spermatozoa in the ejaculate in patients with nonobstructive azoospermia (NOA), testicular sperm extraction (TESE) may be performed to find the focal area of spermatogenesis. A 47-year-old man with NOA presented for treatment of secondary couple infertility. The patient underwent a first TESE 7 years earlier with cryopreservation, and an intracytoplasmic sperm injection-embryo transfer ended in a term pregnancy. He reported a history of repeated testicular traumas. At the present time, a complete medical workup was carried out, including clinical history, general and genital physical examination, scrotal and transrectal ultrasounds. Hormone measurements showed follicle-stimulating hormone level of 42.7 IU/L, luteinising hormone of 11.4 IU/L, total testosterone of 2.6 ng/ml and right and left testicular volume, respectively, of 4 and 3.9 ml. He underwent a second TESE, with successful sperm retrieval and cryopreservation. The histological pattern was hypospermatogenesis. In cases of extreme testicular impairment, although in the presence of very high follicle-stimulating hormone value and small testicular volume, estimating poor sperm recovery potential, the integration of clinical and anamnestic data, could help the surgeon to practise the more appropriate method of treatment.

Longstanding survival without cancer progression in a patient affected by endometrial carcinoma treated primarily with leuprolide.

We report here a case of a patient affected by endometrial cancer and treated primarily with leuprolide, the surgical approach being unfeasible due to her compromised conditions. The therapy was continued for more than 6 years, and no progression of the disease was observed. During this period, some histological and immunohistochemical evaluations of the tumour (morphology, grading, proliferation and apoptotic index, E-cadherin expression) were performed. Furthermore, the expression of m-RNA for luteinizing-hormone releasing hormone (LHRH) receptors was determined. The results showed a discrepancy between some biological parameters of the tumour and its clinical characteristics. In fact, despite features suggestive of a progression of the cancer (such as the increase of both tumour grading and proliferating capacity (MIB-1), and a fall in the reparative process (appearance of mutated p53, reduced expression of both bcl-2 and c-erb-2) being detected, neither local invasion nor metastatic lesions were clinically observed. This discrepancy might be due to the maintenance of high levels of E-cadhezin. Moreover, since this tumour was shown to express mRNA for LHRH receptors, new evidence is provided about the favourable impact of LHRH analogue treatment in patients affected by endometrial cancer.