[Testicular and epididymal sperm extraction surgery]. / Chirurgies d'extraction de spermatozoïdes testiculaires et épididymaires.

BACKGROUND: Testicular and epididymal sperm extraction surgery is a frequent procedure. However, to date, there has been no French consensus on the technique to be preferred in the various situations of male infertility and on the best way to perform them. We therefore decided to proceed with a formalized expert consensus, using the method recommended by the French National Authority for Health. The aim was to provide the French urology community with practical advice on how best to perform these procedures. METHODS: Twenty-six international experts met online for the consensus. A research committee carried out a comprehensive literature review and prepared the 55 statements submitted to the rating group. After 2 rounds of scoring, 50 recommendations were validated in March 2023, having achieved a consensus of more than 85% among the experts. RESULTS: The consensus covered (1) preparation for sperm extraction surgery, (2) the different sperm extraction surgery techniques (Microsurgical epididymal sperm aspiration [MESA], Percutaneous epididymal sperm aspiration [PESA], Conventional Testicular Sperm Extraction [TESE], Microsurgical Testicular Sperm Extraction [micro-TESE]), (3) advice to be given to the patient concerning the postoperative period, before presenting the results of the sperm extraction surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: The expert consensus meeting on the performance of sperm extraction surgery presented a set of clinical guidelines based on the available literature and expert opinion. These guidelines should have a favourable effect on the development of this activity in France.

Combined Use of Whole Exome Sequencing and CRISPR/Cas9 to Study the Etiology of Non-Obstructive Azoospermia: Demonstration of the Dispensable Role of the Testis-Specific Genes C1orf185 and CCT6B.

The genetic landscape of male infertility is highly complex. It is estimated that at least 4000 genes are involved in human spermatogenesis, but only few have so far been extensively studied. In this study, we investigated by whole exome sequencing two cases of idiopathic non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) due to severe hypospermatogenesis. After variant filtering and prioritizing, we retained for each patient a homozygous loss-of-function (LoF) variant in a testis-specific gene, C1orf185 (c.250C>T; p.Gln84Ter) and CCT6B (c.615-2A>G), respectively. Both variants are rare according to the gnomAD database and absent from our local control cohort (n = 445). To verify the implication of these candidate genes in NOA, we used the CRISPR/Cas9 system to invalidate the mouse orthologs 4930522H14Rik and Cct6b and produced two knockout (KO) mouse lines. Sperm and testis parameters of homozygous KO adult male mice were analyzed and compared with those of wild-type animals. We showed that homozygous KO males were fertile and displayed normal sperm parameters and a functional spermatogenesis. Overall, these results demonstrate that not all genes highly and specifically expressed in the testes are essential for spermatogenesis, and in particular, we conclude that bi-allelic variants of C1orf185 and CCT6B are most likely not to be involved in NOA and male fertility.

Step-by-step loupes-mTESE in non-obstructive azoospermic men, a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Men with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) may have sperm in their testes and a procedure of sperm retrieval and assisted reproduction is required in them to allow fertility. Standard procedures such as fine needle aspiration (FNA) and conventional testicular sperm extraction (cTESE) harvest random samples with a sperm retrieval rate (SRR) of 45%. Microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) is nowadays considered to be the most accurate technique to retrieve sperm in men with NOA. This procedure can identify dilated tubules that are more likely to contain viable sperm with a SRR of 60%. RESULTS: In our center, testicular biopsy was conducted in a standard fashion in 321 patients with NOA until March 2003. From then to December 2017, due to the lack of an operating microscope, we used 6 fold magnifying loupes to perform a step-by-step macro- mTESE in 1050 patients. Sperm was found in the first testis in 61% of the cases, leading to stop the procedure with less testicular damage. We increased our SRR from 43 to 51.8% in an acceptable operating time of 75mn for both sides. CONCLUSIONS: In institutions where surgeons cannot afford an operating microscope, this modified mTESE technique using × 6 magnifying loupes is reliable, especially in patients with low testicular volumes and high FSH, in whom dilated tubules can be easily identified from the surrounding tissue.

CONTEXTE: Les patients ayant une azoospermie non obstructive confirmée peuvent néanmoins présenter des spermatozoïdes intratesticulaires nécessitant un prélèvement chirurgical en vue d'une injection intra cytoplasmique d'un spermatozoïde (ICSI). L'aspiration à l'aiguille ainsi que la biopsie classique à ciel ouvert ne permettent qu'un prélèvement aléatoire à l'aveugle assorti d'un taux de positivité de 45%. La biopsie avec microdissection sous microscope est. désormais considérée comme le « gold standard ¼ et permet d'identifier les foyers de tubes séminifères dilatés qui sont le plus à même de contenir des spermatozoïdes mobiles. RÉSULTATS: Dans notre centre d'Assistance Médicale à la Procréation (AMP), jusqu'en février 2003, le recueil de spermatozoïdes pour ICSI a été réalisé par une biopsie classique chez 321 patients avec une positivité de 43%. De mars 2003 à décembre 2017, du fait de l'absence de microscope opératoire, nous avons adapté le prélèvement microchirurgical à des loupes de fort grossissement (× 6) et pratiqué cette technique simplifiée chez 1050 patients. Les fragments sont examinés en extemporané par les embryologistes et chez 61% des patients, la positivité de la biopsie dans le premier testicule prélevé permet de sursoir à l'exploration du côté controlatéral, évitant ainsi une dissection inutile et potentiellement délétère. Grâce à cette modification, nous sommes passés de 43% à 51,8% de positivité avec un temps opératoire moyen de 75mn pour les 2 côtés. CONCLUSION: Dans les centres d'AMP où l'on ne dispose pas de microscope opératoire ou lorsque le programme ne permet pas d'allouer une longue durée opératoire à la biopsie testiculaire sans compromettre le reste de l'activité chirurgicale, l'utilisation de loupes à fort grossissement (× 6) permet l'amélioration des résultats de la biopsie, particulièrement chez les patients présentant un petit volume testiculaire et une FSH élevée.

[Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial experience: about two cases]. / Prostatectomie radicale coelioscopique: début d'expérience: a propos de deux cas.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy was a major breakthrough in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. AIM: To report the first two laparoscopic radical prostatectomies performed in Tunisia. CASES REPORT: The two patients are aged 57 and 66 and were suffering from localized prostate cancer. We first tested the transperitoneal and under-peritoneal paths. We then used an anterogradic surgery technique with preservation of the bladder-neck, extra-facial dissection of neuro-vascular bandles and vesicourethral running anastomosis. The two procedures lasted 435 and 305 minutes. We did not have any conversion nor blood transfusion. Post-operatory situation was simple. The two patients were kept in clinic for 4 days and the trans-urethral catheter was removed 7 days following the surgery. The anatomo-pathologic study finds a negative surgical margins for both patients. 3 months later, both patients are continents. Only one of them showed an erection with phosphodieseterase type 5 inhibitors. The total PSA is indetectable. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer is a technique that has proven its effectiveness since 10 years at least.