RESUMO
PURPOSE: From a diagnostic standpoint, certain approaches to genetic screening in clinical practice remain ambiguous in the era of assisted reproduction. Even the most current guidelines do not provide definite guidance on testing protocols, leaving clinicians to carefully determine which tests best serve patients struggling with infertility. The lack of uniformity in the current practice of male fertility evaluation can prove to be quite costly, thus necessitating healthcare practitioners to carefully appraise the necessity and weigh the advantages against potential economic and psychological detriments. The objective of this review is to map the existing literature on the general topic of the clinical indications of routine karyotyping and/or AZF screening in infertile men, identify key concepts, determine where the gaps are, and lastly, provide an overview of the conclusions drawn from a body of knowledge that varies widely in terms of methodologies or disciplines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A thorough search was conducted for the published findings up until July 2023, utilizing PubMed (MEDLINE). This comprehensive search involved the use of specific search keywords, either individually or in combination. The search terms employed were as follows: "Karyotype", "Klinefelter" or "KS" or "47,XXY", "AZF" or "Azoospermi*" and/or "microdeletion*" in the title or abstract. Once the titles and abstracts of selected articles were obtained, the complete texts of linked papers were meticulously scrutinized. RESULTS: A total of 191 records were identified from PubMed. During screening, 161 records (84.3%) were eliminated. Finally, 30 papers were included in this scoping review, which was conducted in 18 countries. The number of sequence tag sites (STSs) used in the studies varied from 5 to 59. The rate of AZF deletions among patients with NOA ranged from 1.3% to 53%. The mean frequency was estimated to be 5.6%. The rate of YCM among patients with XXY karyotype was nil in 19 out of 30 studies (63%), whilst, in the remaining studies, the rate varied from 0.8% to 67%. CONCLUSION: This review provides insights into managing male infertility. The presence of spermatozoa in ejaculation and successful surgical retrieval cannot be excluded for individuals with AZFb/AZFbc microdeletions. Screening for Y chromosome microdeletions is not needed for mosaic or classic KS. Only 1% of individuals with sperm concentration exceeding 1×106 sperm/mL and less than 5×106 sperm/mL exhibit AZF microdeletions; therefore, testing referral for such populations may need reassessment. Individuals with mosaic monosomy X karyotype and certain chromosomal anomalies should be referred for AZF deletion screening. These findings have implications for male infertility management and future research.
Assuntos
Testes Genéticos , Infertilidade Masculina , Humanos , Masculino , Infertilidade Masculina/genética , Infertilidade Masculina/diagnóstico , CariotipagemRESUMO
PURPOSE: Non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) represents the persistent absence of sperm in ejaculate without obstruction, stemming from diverse disease processes. This survey explores global practices in NOA diagnosis, comparing them with guidelines and offering expert recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 56-item questionnaire survey on NOA diagnosis and management was conducted globally from July to September 2022. This paper focuses on part 1, evaluating NOA diagnosis. Data from 367 participants across 49 countries were analyzed descriptively, with a Delphi process used for expert recommendations. RESULTS: Of 336 eligible responses, most participants were experienced attending physicians (70.93%). To diagnose azoospermia definitively, 81.7% requested two semen samples. Commonly ordered hormone tests included serum follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) (97.0%), total testosterone (92.9%), and luteinizing hormone (86.9%). Genetic testing was requested by 66.6%, with karyotype analysis (86.2%) and Y chromosome microdeletions (88.3%) prevalent. Diagnostic testicular biopsy, distinguishing obstructive azoospermia (OA) from NOA, was not performed by 45.1%, while 34.6% did it selectively. Differentiation relied on physical examination (76.1%), serum hormone profiles (69.6%), and semen tests (68.1%). Expectations of finding sperm surgically were higher in men with normal FSH, larger testes, and a history of sperm in ejaculate. CONCLUSIONS: This expert survey, encompassing 367 participants from 49 countries, unveils congruence with recommended guidelines in NOA diagnosis. However, noteworthy disparities in practices suggest a need for evidence-based, international consensus guidelines to standardize NOA evaluation, addressing existing gaps in professional recommendations.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) is a common, but complex problem, with multiple therapeutic options and a lack of clear guidelines. Hence, there is considerable controversy and marked variation in the management of NOA. This survey evaluates contemporary global practices related to medical and surgical management for patients with NOA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 56-question online survey covering various aspects of the evaluation and management of NOA was sent to specialists around the globe. This paper analyzes the results of the second half of the survey dealing with the management of NOA. Results have been compared to current guidelines, and expert recommendations have been provided using a Delphi process. RESULTS: Participants from 49 countries submitted 336 valid responses. Hormonal therapy for 3 to 6 months was suggested before surgical sperm retrieval (SSR) by 29.6% and 23.6% of participants for normogonadotropic hypogonadism and hypergonadotropic hypogonadism respectively. The SSR rate was reported as 50.0% by 26.0% to 50.0% of participants. Interestingly, 46.0% reported successful SSR in <10% of men with Klinefelter syndrome and 41.3% routinely recommended preimplantation genetic testing. Varicocele repair prior to SSR is recommended by 57.7%. Half of the respondents (57.4%) reported using ultrasound to identify the most vascularized areas in the testis for SSR. One-third proceed directly to microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) in every case of NOA while others use a staged approach. After a failed conventional TESE, 23.8% wait for 3 months, while 33.1% wait for 6 months before proceeding to mTESE. The cut-off of follicle-stimulating hormone for positive SSR was reported to be 12-19 IU/mL by 22.5% of participants and 20-40 IU/mL by 27.8%, while 31.8% reported no upper limit. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest survey to date on the real-world medical and surgical management of NOA by reproductive experts. It demonstrates a diverse practice pattern and highlights the need for evidence-based international consensus guidelines.
RESUMO
The role of partial epididymal obstruction as contributing to the development of oligozoospermia has been neglected for decades. In the early 1970s, however, Robert Schoysman, a gynecological surgeon devoted to the surgical and medical management of male factor infertility, dedicated many efforts to study such a pathology and its possible effects on male fertility. Following the studies of this pioneer in the field, we concentrated our attention to the patterns of partial and complete epididymal obstruction during surgical scrotal exploration, once made possible even in oligozoospermic men by diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, such as vasovesciculography or seminal tract washout test, at present considered obsolete and no longer feasible in light of the current guidelines. Interestingly, we found signs of partial epididymal obstruction in about 30% of oligozoospermic men with normal testicular volume and serum FSH level as well as normal spermatogenesis at testis biopsy. We, then, compared the findings of scrotal ultrasound with those of scrotal exploration and found that the ultrasound abnormalities of the epididymis were highly predictive of anatomic alteration of the gland. In the present study, we report our experience, together with a historical review of the literature, on this topic.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: The purpose of this meta-analysis is to study the impact of varicocele repair in the largest cohort of infertile males with clinical varicocele by including all available studies, with no language restrictions, comparing intra-person conventional semen parameters before and after the repair of varicoceles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA-P and MOOSE guidelines. A systematic search was performed in Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases. Eligible studies were selected according to the PICOS model (Population: infertile male patients with clinical varicocele; Intervention: varicocele repair; Comparison: intra-person before-after varicocele repair; Outcome: conventional semen parameters; Study type: randomized controlled trials [RCTs], observational and case-control studies). RESULTS: Out of 1,632 screened abstracts, 351 articles (23 RCTs, 292 observational, and 36 case-control studies) were included in the quantitative analysis. The before-and-after analysis showed significant improvements in all semen parameters after varicocele repair (except sperm vitality); semen volume: standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.203, 95% CI: 0.129-0.278; p<0.001; I²=83.62%, Egger's p=0.3329; sperm concentration: SMD 1.590, 95% CI: 1.474-1.706; p<0.001; I²=97.86%, Egger's p<0.0001; total sperm count: SMD 1.824, 95% CI: 1.526-2.121; p<0.001; I²=97.88%, Egger's p=0.0063; total motile sperm count: SMD 1.643, 95% CI: 1.318-1.968; p<0.001; I²=98.65%, Egger's p=0.0003; progressive sperm motility: SMD 1.845, 95% CI: 1.537%-2.153%; p<0.001; I²=98.97%, Egger's p<0.0001; total sperm motility: SMD 1.613, 95% CI 1.467%-1.759%; p<0.001; l2=97.98%, Egger's p<0.001; sperm morphology: SMD 1.066, 95% CI 0.992%-1.211%; p<0.001; I²=97.87%, Egger's p=0.1864. CONCLUSIONS: The current meta-analysis is the largest to date using paired analysis on varicocele patients. In the current meta-analysis, almost all conventional semen parameters improved significantly following varicocele repair in infertile patients with clinical varicocele.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) is a functional sperm abnormality that can impact reproductive potential, for which four assays have been described in the recently published sixth edition of the WHO laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen. The purpose of this study was to examine the global practices related to the use of SDF assays and investigate the barriers and limitations that clinicians face in incorporating these tests into their practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinicians managing male infertility were invited to complete an online survey on practices related to SDF diagnostic and treatment approaches. Their responses related to the technical aspects of SDF testing, current professional society guidelines, and the literature were used to generate expert recommendations via the Delphi method. Finally, challenges related to SDF that the clinicians encounter in their daily practice were captured. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 436 reproductive clinicians. Overall, terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase deoxyuridine triphosphate Nick-End Labeling (TUNEL) is the most commonly used assay chosen by 28.6%, followed by the sperm chromatin structure assay (24.1%), and the sperm chromatin dispersion (19.1%). The choice of the assay was largely influenced by availability (70% of respondents). A threshold of 30% was the most selected cut-off value for elevated SDF by 33.7% of clinicians. Of respondents, 53.6% recommend SDF testing after 3 to 5 days of abstinence. Although 75.3% believe SDF testing can provide an explanation for many unknown causes of infertility, the main limiting factors selected by respondents are a lack of professional society guideline recommendations (62.7%) and an absence of globally accepted references for SDF interpretation (50.3%). CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the largest global survey on the technical aspects of SDF testing as well as the barriers encountered by clinicians. Unified global recommendations regarding clinician implementation and standard laboratory interpretation of SDF testing are crucial.
RESUMO
The impact of hypogonadism on the probability of retrieving testicular sperm from patients with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) is still a matter of debate. Conflicting evidence in this field may be justified by the striking differences between serum and intratesticular testosterone (ITT) levels found in men with severe spermatogenic dysfunction, so that normal ITT levels may coexist with low serum testosterone levels. Here we report the case of a patient with NOA with a steadily reduced serum testosterone level irresponsive to hormonal stimulation with human chorionic gonadotropin. Supported by his normal serum 17-hydroxyprogesterone (17 OHP) levels, previously suggested to be marker of ITT levels, microdissection testicular sperm extraction was performed for both testes on two separate occasions, resulting in the retrieval of enough sperm for ICSI. Three ICSI cycles were then performed, one blastocyst was transferred, and five were cryopreserved. This case report suggests that normal serum 17 OHP levels, being suggestive of normal ITT levels, may support the decision to proceed with surgical sperm retrieval in hypogonadal patients with NOA, even for those irresponsive to hormonal treatment.
RESUMO
The body of evidence supports the negative impact of increased sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) on natural fertility as well as assisted reproduction conditions. High SDF has been correlated with low pregnancy and delivery rates following intrauterine insemination. Also, high SDF is accused of reducing the rates of fertilization, implantation, pregnancy, and live birth following in-vitro fertilization (IVF). Despite no impact of high SDF on fertilization or pregnancy rates following intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), it has been correlated with poor embryo quality and a higher risk of miscarriage. Several methods have been introduced to help select sperm with the best DNA quality to be used in assisted reproductive technology procedures. These include magnetic-activated cell sorting, intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection, physiologic ICSI, and microfluidic sperm sorters, among others. This article aimed to discuss the impact of high SDF in infertile men on the reproductive outcome of couples undergoing IVF/ICSI. Additionally, this review highlights the principles, advantages, and limitations of different techniques that are currently used for the selection of sperm with intact DNA to be utilized for ICSI.
Assuntos
Sêmen , Injeções de Esperma Intracitoplásmicas , Gravidez , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Injeções de Esperma Intracitoplásmicas/métodos , Fragmentação do DNA , Espermatozoides , Fertilização in vitroRESUMO
Male infertility accounts for 30% of infertility cases and its prevalence in the general population approximately ranges between 9 and 15%, according to the available surveys [...].
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Despite all past efforts, the current guidelines are not explicit enough regarding the indications for performing azoospermia factor (AZF) screening and karyotype, burdening clinicians with the decision to assess whether such tests are meaningful for the infertile male patient. These assessments can be costly and it is up to the healthcare practitioner to decide which are necessary and to weigh the benefits against economic/psychological harm. The aim of this study is to address such gaps and provide update on current management options for this group of patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To address such gaps in male infertility management and to elucidate whether AZF screening is indicated in individuals who concomitantly harbor chromosomal abnormalities we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of 10,388 consecutive patients with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) and severe oligozoospermia. RESULTS: Previously, it has been suggested that all NOA cases with chromosomal defects, except males with 46,XY/45,X karyotype, have no indication for AZF screening. Our findings revealed that cases carrying the following chromosomal abnormalities inv(Y)(p11.2q12); idic(Y)(q11.2); 46,XY,r(Y); idic(Y)(p11.2) and der(Y;Autosome) (76/169; 44.9%; 95% CI, 37.7-52.5) should also be referred for AZF deletion screening. Here, we also report the correlation between sperm count and AZF deletions as a secondary outcome. In accordance with previously reported data from North America and Europe, our data revealed that only 1% of cases with >1×106 sperm/mL had Y chromosome microdeletions (YCMs). CONCLUSIONS: In the era of assisted reproduction, finding cost-minimization strategies in infertility clinics without affecting the quality of diagnosis is becoming one of the top prioritized topics for future research. From a diagnostic viewpoint, the results reflect a need to reconsider the different karyotype presentations and the sperm count thresholds in male infertility guidelines as indicators for YCM screening during an infertility evaluation.
RESUMO
Antisperm antibodies (ASA), as a cause of male infertility, have been detected in infertile males as early as 1954. Multiple causes of ASA production have been identified, and they are due to an abnormal exposure of mature germ cells to the immune system. ASA testing (with mixed anti-globulin reaction, and immunobead binding test) was described in the WHO manual 5th edition and is most recently listed among the extended semen tests in the WHO manual 6th edition. The relationship between ASA and infertility is somewhat complex. The presence of sperm agglutination, while insufficient to diagnose immunological infertility, may indicate the presence of ASA. However, ASA can also be present in the absence of any sperm agglutination. The andrological management of ASA depends on the etiology and individual practices of clinicians. In this article, we provide a comprehensive review of the causes of ASA production, its role in immunological male infertility, clinical indications of ASA testing, and the available therapeutic options. We also provide the details of laboratory procedures for assessment of ASA together with important measures for quality control. Additionally, laboratory and clinical scenarios are presented to guide the reader in the management of ASA and immunological male infertility. Furthermore, we report the results of a recent worldwide survey, conducted to gather information about clinical practices in the management of immunological male infertility.
RESUMO
Sperm vitality testing is a basic semen examination that has been described in the World Health Organization (WHO) Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen from its primary edition, 40 years ago. Several methods can be used to test sperm vitality, such as the eosin-nigrosin (E-N) stain or the hypoosmotic swelling (HOS) test. In the 6th (2021) edition of the WHO Laboratory Manual, sperm vitality assessment is mainly recommended if the total motility is less than 40%. Hence, a motile spermatozoon is considered alive, however, in certain conditions an immotile spermatozoon can also be alive. Therefore, the differentiation between asthenozoospermia (pathological decrease in sperm motility) and necrozoospermia (pathological decrease in sperm vitality) is important in directing further investigation and management of infertile patients. The causes leading to necrozoospermia are diverse and can either be local or general, testicular or extra-testicular. The andrological management of necrozoospermia depends on its etiology. However, there is no standardized treatment available presently and practice varies among clinicians. In this study, we report the results of a global survey to understand current practices regarding the physician order of sperm vitality tests as well as the management practices for necrozoospermia. Laboratory and clinical scenarios are presented to guide the reader in the management of necrozoospermia with the overall objective of establishing a benchmark ranging from the diagnosis of necrozoospermia by sperm vitality testing to its clinical management.
RESUMO
Retrograde ejaculation (RE) is a condition defined as the backward flow of the semen during ejaculation, and when present can result in male infertility. RE may be partial or complete, resulting in either low seminal volume or complete absence of the ejaculate (dry ejaculate). RE can result from anatomic, neurological or pharmacological conditions. The treatment approaches outlined are determined by the cause. Alkalinizing urinary pH with oral medications or by adding sperm wash media into the bladder prior to ejaculation may preserve the viability of the sperm. This article provides a step-by-step guide to diagnose RE and the optimal techniques to retrieve sperm.
RESUMO
The current WHO 2010 manual for human semen analysis defines leukocytospermia as the presence of peroxidase-positive leukocytes at a concentration >1×106/mL of semen. Granular leukocytes when activated are capable of generating high levels of reactive oxygen species in semen resulting in oxidative stress. Oxidative stress has been correlated with poor sperm quality, increased level of sperm DNA fragmentation and low fertility potential. The presence of leukocytes and pathogens in the semen may be a sign of infection and/or localized inflammatory response in the male genital tract and the accessory glands. Common uro-pathogens including Chlamydia trachomatis, Ureaplasma urealyticum, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Mycoplasma hominis, and Escherichia coli can cause epididymitis, epididymo-orchitis, or prostatitis. The relationship between leukocytospermia and infection is unclear. Therefore, we describe the pathogens responsible for male genital tract infections and their association with leukocytospermia. The review also examines the diagnostic tests available to identify seminal leukocytes. The role of leukocytospermia in male infertility and its management is also discussed.
RESUMO
Microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) has been demonstrated to be the gold-standard surgical technique for retrieving testicular sperm in patients with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) as it enables the exploration of the whole testicular parenchyma at a high magnification, allowing the identification of the rare dilated seminipherous tubules that may contain sperm, usually surrounded by thinner or atrophic tubules. MTESE requires a skilled and experienced surgeon whose learning curve may greatly affect the sperm retrieval rate, as demonstrated in previous reports. The present review is intended to offer a precise and detailed description of the mTESE surgical procedure, accompanied by an extensive iconography, to provide urologists with valuable information to be translated into clinical practice. Advice about the pre-surgical and post-surgical management of patients is also offered.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Patients with non-obstructive azoospermia with a previously failed conventional testicular sperm extraction may undergo a salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction with the probability of successful sperm retrieval being almost dependent upon the number of previous surgical attempts and to different histopathologic categories. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the seminiferous tubules pattern and the histological categories could affect the sperm retrieval rate in patients with non-obstructive azoospermia undergoing salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction after failed conventional testicular sperm extraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-nine patients undergoing unilateral or bilateral salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction were evaluated. During microdissection testicular sperm extraction, if present, dilated tubules were retrieved, otherwise, tubules with slightly larger caliber than that of the surroundings were removed. When no dilated tubule or tubule with slightly larger caliber was found, not dilated tubules were excised. A prediction model was built with seminiferous tubules pattern and testis histology as covariates. RESULTS: Sperm retrieval was successful in 30 out of 79 patients. The prediction model correctly classified 88.3% of cases, explained the 29.7% variability of the outcome, and significantly predicted the microdissection testicular sperm extraction outcome with a sensitivity of 67.7% and a specificity of 90.2%, Both tubules with slightly larger caliber and not dilated tubules were negatively associated with the chance of retrieving spermatozoa. Among the histological categories, only early maturation arrest was significant to the model (log(SSR) = 0.57 - 1.9SDT - 3.3NDT - 1.76EMA) (where SSR is sperm retrieval rate, SDT is tubule with slightly larger caliber, NDT is not dilated tubule, and EMA is early maturation arrest). The model had a clearly useful discrimination (area under the curve = 0.814), the estimated performance was 0.8105, and internal calibration was acceptable (p > 0.05). DISCUSSION: Seminiferous tubules pattern and testis histology may reliably explain the salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction outcome in all patients with non-obstructive azoospermia apart from those with early maturation arrest, where the homogeneous apparent seminiferous tubules pattern may be misleading. CONCLUSION: The outcome of salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction can be predicted by the same intrasurgical parameters that have been demonstrated to predict the outcome of microdissection testicular sperm extraction in naïve patients with non-obstructive azoospermia.
Assuntos
Azoospermia/cirurgia , Microdissecção/métodos , Terapia de Salvação/métodos , Recuperação Espermática/estatística & dados numéricos , Testículo/cirurgia , Adulto , Regras de Decisão Clínica , Humanos , Período Intraoperatório , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Túbulos Seminíferos/cirurgia , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
PURPOSE: The use of antioxidants is common practice in the management of infertile patients. However, there are no established guidelines by professional societies on antioxidant use for male infertility. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using an online survey, this study aimed to evaluate the practice pattern of reproductive specialists to determine the clinical utility of oxidative stress (OS) testing and antioxidant prescriptions to treat male infertility. RESULTS: Responses from 1,327 participants representing 6 continents, showed the largest participant representation being from Asia (46.8%). The majority of participants were attending physicians (59.6%), with 61.3% having more than 10 years of experience in the field of male infertility. Approximately two-thirds of clinicians (65.7%) participated in this survey did not order any diagnostic tests for OS. Sperm DNA fragmentation was the most common infertility test beyond a semen analysis that was prescribed to study oxidative stress-related dysfunctions (53.4%). OS was mainly tested in the presence of lifestyle risk factors (24.6%) or sperm abnormalities (16.3%). Interestingly, antioxidants were prescribed by 85.6% of clinicians, for a duration of 3 (43.7%) or 3-6 months (38.6%). A large variety of antioxidants and dietary supplements were prescribed, and scientific evidence were mostly considered to be modest to support their clinical use. Results were not influenced by the physician's age, geographic origin, experience or training in male infertility. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the largest online survey performed to date on this topic and demonstrates 1) a worldwide understanding of the importance of this therapeutic option, and 2) a widely prevalent use of antioxidants to treat male infertility. Finally, the necessity of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines from professional societies is highlighted.
RESUMO
Hormonal stimulation of spermatogenesis prior to surgery has been tested by some authors to maximize the sperm retrieval yield in patients with nonobstructive azoospermia. Although the rationale of such an approach is theoretically sound, studies have provided conflicting results, and there are unmet questions that need to be addressed. In the present narrative review, we reviewed the current knowledge about the hormonal control of spermatogenesis, the relationship between presurgical serum hormones levels and sperm retrieval rates, and the results of studies investigating the effect of hormonal treatments prior to microdissection testicular sperm extraction. We pooled the available data about sperm retrieval rate in patients with low vs. normal testosterone levels, and found that patients with normal testosterone levels had a significantly higher chance of successful sperm retrieval compared to those with subnormal T levels (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.08-2.45, p = 0.02). These data suggest that hormonal treatment may be justified in patients with hypogonadism; on the other hand, the available evidence is insufficient to recommend hormonal therapy as standard clinical practice to improve the sperm retrieval rate in patients with nonobstructive azoospermia.
RESUMO
The prolonged lockdown of health facilities providing non-urgent gamete cryopreservation-as currently recommended by many reproductive medicine entities and regulatory authorities due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic will be detrimental for subgroups of male infertility patients. We believe the existing recommendations should be promptly modified and propose that the same permissive approach for sperm banking granted for men with cancer is expanded to other groups of vulnerable patients. These groups include infertility patients (eg, azoospermic and cryptozoospermic) undergoing medical or surgical treatment to improve sperm quantity and quality, as well as males of reproductive age affected by inflammatory and systemic auto-immune diseases who are about to start treatment with gonadotoxic drugs or who are under remission. In both scenarios, the "fertility window" may be transitory; postponing diagnostic semen analysis and sperm banking in these men could compromise the prospects of biological parenthood. Moreover, we provide recommendations on how to continue the provision of andrological services in a considered manner and a safe environment. Our opinion is timely and relevant given the fact that fertility services are currently rated as of low priority in most countries.
Assuntos
Andrologia/organização & administração , COVID-19 , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde/organização & administração , Necessidades e Demandas de Serviços de Saúde/organização & administração , Infertilidade Masculina/terapia , Avaliação das Necessidades/organização & administração , Humanos , Infertilidade Masculina/diagnóstico , Infertilidade Masculina/fisiopatologia , MasculinoRESUMO
Azoospermia, defined as the absence of sperm in the ejaculate after examination of the centrifuged specimens, affects about 1% of the male population and 10-15% of infertile men [...].