Microsurgical testicular sperm extraction (MicroTESE)in patients with non-obstructive azoospermia

Cover Page


Modern methods of treating infertility in men with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) are considered. The prognostic factors of successful sperm production by invasive manipulation on the testicles are analyzed. The aspects of hormonal preparation of patients with NOA before surgery are considered. Identification of additional hormonal factors such as follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), inhibin B in serum and seminal plasma allows more accurately predict the outcome of microsurgical testicular sperm extraction (MicroTESE). A high level of FSH is not a contraindication for microTESE in men with NOA. Neither the FSH level nor the testicle volume are associated with the effectiveness of the operation, moreover is observed an inverse interrelation. The advantages of microsurgical technique of performing the operation and its effectiveness are considered.

Aleksandr V Kurenkov

Author for correspondence.
North-Western State Medical University n. a. I.I. Mechnikov
Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

doctor of medical science, associate professor of Department of Urology

Sergej N Kulikov

Mariinsky City Hospital
Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg


  • El-Haggar S, Mostafa T, Abdel Nasser T, et al. Fine needle aspiration vs. mTESE in non-obstructive azoospermia. Int J Androl. 2008;31(6):595-601. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2605.2007.00814.x.
  • Deruyver Y, Vanderschueren D, Van der Aa F. Outcome of microdissection TESE compared with conventional TESE in non-obstructive azoospermia: a systematic review. Andrology. 2014;2(1):2356-2358. doi: 10.1111/j.2047-2927.2013.00148.x.
  • Aaron M, Bernie MD, Douglas A, et al. Comparison of microdissection testicular sperm extraction, conventional testicular sperm extraction, and testicular sperm aspiration for nonobstructive azoospermia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2015;104(5):23-28.
  • Turunc T, Gul U, Haydardedeoglu B, et al. Conventional testicular sperm extraction combined with the microdissection technique in nonobstructive azoospermic patients: a prospective comparative study. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(6):2157-2160. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.01.008.
  • Schlegel PN. Testicular sperm extraction: microdissection improves sperm yield with minimal tissue excision. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(1):131-135. doi: 10.1093/humrep/14.1.131.
  • Donoso P, Tournaye H, Devroey P. Which is the best sperm retrieval technique for non-obstructive azoospermia? A systematic review. Hum Reprod. 2007;13(6):539-549. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmm029.
  • Amer M, Ateyah A, Hany R, Zohdy W. Prospective comparative study between microsurgical and conventional testicular sperm extraction in non-obstructive azoospermia: follow-up by serial ultrasound examinations. Hum Reprod. 2000;15(3):653-656. doi: 10.1093/humrep/15.3.653.
  • Ramasamy R, Schlegel PN. Microdissection testicular sperm extraction: effect of prior biopsy on success of sperm retrieval. J Urol. 2007;177(4):1447-1449. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.11.039.
  • Bernie AM, Shah K, Halpern JA, et al. Outcomes of microdissection testicular sperm extraction in men with nonobstructive azoospermia due to maturation arrest. Fertil Steril. 2015;104(3):569-573. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.05.037.
  • Brandell RA, Mielnik A, Liotta D, et al. AZFb deletions predict the absence of spermatozoa with testicular sperm extraction: preliminary report of a prognostic genetic test. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(10): 2812-2815. doi: 10.1093/humrep/13.10.2812.


Abstract - 125

PDF (Russian) - 76

Copyright (c) 2017 ECO-vector LLC

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.