Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The development of surgical sperm extraction and new challenges to improve the outcome

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Reproductive Medicine and Biology

Abstract

Surgical sperm extraction with intracytoplasmic sperm injection has become widespread worldwide and is regarded as the sole option for patients with azoospermia. However, the sperm retrieval rate remains unsatisfactorily low, particularly for men with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA). Therefore, the technical challenges associated with improving the sperm retrieval rate for men with NOA are being addressed. The most successful method developed to date is microdissection testicular sperm extraction (micro-TESE), which is rapidly becoming recognized as a useful technique due to its relatively high sperm retrieval rate and low complication rate. However, even with micro-TESE, the sperm retrieval rate for men with NOA remains at 30–60 %, with an even lower birth rate. The technical challenges associated with improving the outcomes of surgical sperm extraction are being approached through the use of ultrasound and optimal surgical devices such as narrow band imaging, multiphoton microscopy, and optical coherent tomography. In addition to the difficulties related to searching for sperm, medical treatments that induce spermatogenesis remain controversial. For example, varicocele repair prior to surgical sperm extraction and hormonal therapy before and after TESE have been extensively examined. We herein briefly summarized the development process in surgical sperm extraction up to the present and technical challenges to improve the outcomes of surgical sperm extraction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Willott G. Frequency of azoospermia. Forensic Sci Int. 1982;20(1):9–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jarow J, Espeland M, Lipshultz L. Evaluation of the azoospermic patient. J Urol. 1989;142(1):62–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Temple-Smith PD, et al. Human pregnancy by in vitro fertilization (IVF) using sperm aspirated from the epididymis. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf. 1985;2(3):119–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Silber S, et al. New treatment for infertility due to congenital absence of vas deferens. Lancet. 1987;330(8563):850–1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Palermo G, et al. Pregnancies after intracytoplasmic injection of single spermatozoon into an oocyte. Lancet. 1992;340(8810):17–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Van Steirteghem AC, et al. High fertilization and implantation rates after intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod. 1993;8(7):1061–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Craft I, Bennett V, Nicholson N. Fertilising ability of testicular spermatozoa. Lancet. 1993;342(8875):864.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Schoysman R, et al. Pregnancy after fertilisation with human testicular spermatozoa. Lancet. 1993;342(8881):1237.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Devroey P, et al. Normal fertilization of human oocytes after testicular sperm extraction and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril. 1994;62(3):639–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tournaye H, et al. Recent concepts in the management of infertility because of non-obstructive azoospermia. Hum Reprod. 1995;10(Suppl 1):115–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Devroey P, et al. Pregnancies after testicular sperm extraction and intracytoplasmic sperm injection in non-obstructive azoospermia. Hum Reprod. 1995;10(6):1457–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kahraman S, et al. Fertility with testicular sperm extraction and intracytoplasmic sperm injection in non-obstructive azoospermic men. Hum Reprod. 1996;11(4):756–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Friedler S, et al. Testicular sperm retrieval by percutaneous fine needle sperm aspiration compared with testicular sperm extraction by open biopsy in men with non-obstructive azoospermia. Hum Reprod. 1997;12(7):1488–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Schlegel PN, et al. Testicular sperm extraction with intracytoplasmic sperm injection for nonobstructive azoospermia. Urology. 1997;49(3):435–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rosenlund B, et al. A comparison between open and percutaneous needle biopsies in men with azoospermia. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(5):1266–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tournaye H, et al. Recent concepts in the management of infertility because of non-obstructive azoospermia. Hum Reprod. 1995;10(suppl 1):115–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Tournaye H, et al. Correlation between testicular histology and outcome after intracytoplasmic sperm injection using testicular spermatozoa. Hum Reprod. 1996;11(1):127–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hauser R, et al. Multiple testicular sampling in non-obstructive azoospermia—Is it necessary? Hum Reprod. 1998;13(11):3081–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schlegel PN, Su L-M. Physiological consequences of testicular sperm extraction. Hum Reprod. 1997;12(8):1688–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Tash JA, Schlegel PN. Histologic effects of testicular sperm extraction on the testicle in men with nonobstructive azoospermia. Urology. 2001;57(2):334–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Craft I, et al. Testicular needle aspiration as an alternative to biopsy for the assessment of spermatogenesis. Hum Reprod. 1997;12(7):1483–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sheynkin YR, et al. Controlled comparison of percutaneous and microsurgical sperm retrieval in men with obstructive azoospermia. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(11):3086–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Schlegel PN. Testicular sperm extraction: microdissection improves sperm yield with minimal tissue excision. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(1):131–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Okada H, et al. Conventional versus microdissection testicular sperm extraction for nonobstructive azoospermia. J Urol. 2002;168(3):1063–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ramasamy R, Yagan N, Schlegel PN. Structural and functional changes to the testis after conventional versus microdissection testicular sperm extraction. Urology. 2005;65(6):1190–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Tsujimura A, et al. Conventional multiple or microdissection testicular sperm extraction: a comparative study. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(11):2924–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ishikawa T, et al. Learning curves of microdissection testicular sperm extraction for nonobstructive azoospermia. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(3):1008–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Tsujimura A, et al. Prediction of successful outcome of microdissection testicular sperm extraction in men with idiopathic nonobstructive azoospermia. J Urol. 2004;172(5 Pt 1):1944–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Enatsu N et al. Predictive factors of successful sperm retrieval on microdissection testicular sperm extraction in Japanese men. Reprod Med Biol. 2015;1–5.

  30. Nicopoullos JD, et al. Use of surgical sperm retrieval in azoospermic men: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2004;82(3):691–701.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Morey AF, et al. Technique of biopty gun testis needle biopsy. Urology. 1993;42(3):325–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Hovatta O, et al. Testicular needle biopsy, open biopsy, epididymal aspiration and intracytoplasmic sperm injection in obstructive azoospermia. Hum Reprod. 1995;10(10):2595–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bourne H, et al. Pregnancies after intracytoplasmic injection of sperm collected by fine needle biopsy of the testis. Fertil Steril. 1995;64(2):433–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Rosenlund B, et al. A comparison between open and percutaneous needle biopsies in men with azoospermia. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(5):1266–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ezeh UI, Moore HD, Cooke ID. A prospective study of multiple needle biopsies versus a single open biopsy for testicular sperm extraction in men with non-obstructive azoospermia. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(11):3075–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Lewin A, et al. Testicular fine needle aspiration: the alternative method for sperm retrieval in non-obstructive azoospermia. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(7):1785–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Nassar Z, et al. Fine needle testicular sperm aspiration: an alternative to open testicular biopsy in patients with non-obstructive azoospermia. Fertil Steril. 2001;76(3):S137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Aridogan IA, et al. Comparison of fine-needle aspiration and open biopsy of testis in sperm retrieval and histopathologic diagnosis. Andrologia. 2003;35(2):121–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Hauser R, et al. Comparison of efficacy of two techniques for testicular sperm retrieval in nonobstructive azoospermia: multifocal testicular sperm extraction versus multifocal testicular sperm aspiration. J Androl. 2006;27(1):28–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. El-Haggar S, et al. Fine needle aspiration vs. mTESE in non-obstructive azoospermia. Int J Androl. 2008;31(6):595–601.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Donoso P, Tournaye H, Devroey P. Which is the best sperm retrieval technique for non-obstructive azoospermia? a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2007;13(6):539–49.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. 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):20–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Gil-Salom M, et al. Testicular sperm extraction and intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a chance of fertility in nonobstructive azoospermia. J Urol. 1998;160(6):2063–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Silber SJ, et al. Distribution of spermatogenesis in the testicles of azoospermic men: the presence or absence of spermatids in the testes of men with germinal failure. Hum Reprod. 1997;12(11):2422–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Witt M, et al. The benefit of additional biopsy sites when performing testicular sperm extraction in non obstructive azoospermia. Fertil Steril. 1001;1997(1997):79–80.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Schlegel PN. Testicular sperm extraction: microdissection improves sperm yield with minimal tissue excision. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(1):131–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Schlegel P, Li S. Microdissection TESE: sperm retrieval in non-obstructive azoopsermia VIDEO. Hum Reprod Update. 1998;4(4):439.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Ghalayini IF, et al. Clinical comparison of conventional testicular sperm extraction and microdissection techniques for non-obstructive azoospermia. J Clin Med Res. 2011;3(3):124.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Amer M, et al. 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):653–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Bernie AM, 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):1099–103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Foresta C, et al. Doppler ultrasound of the testis in azoospermic subjects as a parameter of testicular function. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(11):3090–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Har-Toov J, et al. A new power Doppler ultrasound guiding technique for improved testicular sperm extraction. Fertil Steril. 2004;81(2):430–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Herwig R, et al. Tissue perfusion-controlled guided biopsies are essential for the outcome of testicular sperm extraction. Fertil Steril. 2007;87(5):1071–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Herwig R, et al. Tissue perfusion essential for spermatogenesis and outcome of testicular sperm extraction (TESE) for assisted reproduction. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2004;21(5):175–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Enatsu N, et al. Identification of spermatogenically active regions in Rat testes by using narrow band imaging system. Urology 2015;86(5):929–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Sano Y, Emura F, Ikematsu H. Narrow-band imaging. Colonoscopy: principles and practice. 2nd ed. Blackwell Publishing Ltd: New Jersy (United States); 2009. p. 514–26.

  57. Ramasamy R, et al. Identification of spermatogenesis with multiphoton microscopy: an evaluation in a rodent model. J Urol. 2011;186(6):2487–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Ramasamy R, et al. Full field optical coherence tomography can identify spermatogenesis in a rodent sertoli-cell only model. J Pathol Inform. 2012;3:4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Jain M, et al. Modified full-field optical coherence tomography: a novel tool for rapid histology of tissues. J Pathol Inform. 2011;2:28.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Dohle GR, et al. EAU guidelines on male infertility. Eur Urol. 2005;48(5):703–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Lee JS, Park HJ, Seo JT. What is the indication of varicocelectomy in men with nonobstructive azoospermia? Urology. 2007;69(2):352–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Wosnitzer M, Goldstein M, Hardy MP. Review of azoospermia. Spermatogenesis. 2014;4(1):e28218.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Schlegel PN, Kaufmann J. Role of varicocelectomy in men with nonobstructive azoospermia. Fertil Steril. 2004;81(6):1585–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Kim ED, et al. Varicocele repair improves semen parameters in azoospermic men with spermatogenic failure. J Urol. 1999;162(3 Pt 1):737–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Matthews GJ, Matthews ED, Goldstein M. Induction of spermatogenesis and achievement of pregnancy after microsurgical varicocelectomy in men with azoospermia and severe oligoasthenospermia. Fertil Steril. 1998;70(1):71–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Kadioglu A, et al. Microsurgical inguinal varicocele repair in azoospermic men. Urology. 2001;57(2):328–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Schlegel PN, Kaufmann J. Role of varicocelectomy in men with nonobstructive azoospermia. Fertil Steril. 2004;81(6):1585–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Cakan M, Altug U. Induction of spermatogenesis by inguinal varicocele repair in azoospermic men. Arch Androl. 2004;50(3):145–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Esteves SC, Glina S. Recovery of spermatogenesis after microsurgical subinguinal varicocele repair in azoospermic men based on testicular histology. International Braz J Urol: Official J Braz Soc Urology. 2005;31(6):541–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Gat Y, et al. Induction of spermatogenesis in azoospermic men after internal spermatic vein embolization for the treatment of varicocele. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(4):1013–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Poulakis V, et al. Induction of spermatogenesis in men with azoospermia or severe oligoteratoasthenospermia after antegrade internal spermatic vein sclerotherapy for the treatment of varicocele. Asian J Androl. 2006;8(5):613–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Pasqualotto FF, et al. Induction of spermatogenesis in azoospermic men after varicocelectomy repair: an update. Fertil Steril. 2006;85(3):635–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Ishikawa T, et al. Effect of varicocelectomy on patients with unobstructive azoospermia and severe oligospermia. BJU Int. 2008;101(2):216–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Cocuzza M, et al. Use of subinguinal incision for microsurgical testicular biopsy during varicocelectomy in men with nonobstructive azoospermia. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(3):925–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Youssef T, et al. Varicocelectomy in men with nonobstructive azoospermia: is it beneficial? Int J Surg. 2009;7(4):356–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Abdel-Meguid TA. Predictors of sperm recovery and azoospermia relapse in men with nonobstructive azoospermia after varicocele repair. J Urol. 2012;187(1):222–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Inci K, Gunay LM. The role of varicocele treatment in the management of non-obstructive azoospermia. Clinics. 2013;68(Suppl 1):89–98.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Schlegel PN, Goldstein M. Alternate indications for varicocele repair: non-obstructive azoospermia, pain, androgen deficiency and progressive testicular dysfunction. Fertil Steril. 2011;96(6):1288–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Inci K, et al. Sperm retrieval and intracytoplasmic sperm injection in men with nonobstructive azoospermia, and treated and untreated varicocele. J Urol. 2009;182(4):1500–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Fukuda T, et al. Assessment of Time-dependent Changes in Semen Parameters in Infertile Men After Microsurgical Varicocelectomy. Urology. 2015;86(1):48–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Shiraishi K. Hormonal therapy for non-obstructive azoospermia: basic and clinical perspectives. Reprod Med Biol. 2014;14:1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Ramasamy R, et al. Successful fertility treatment for Klinefelter’s syndrome. J Urol. 2009;182(3):1108–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Hussein A, et al. Clomiphene administration for cases of nonobstructive azoospermia: a multicenter study. J Androl. 2005;26(6):787–91 (discussion 92–93).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Shiraishi K, et al. Human chorionic gonadotrophin treatment prior to microdissection testicular sperm extraction in non-obstructive azoospermia. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(2):331–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Selman H, et al. Rescue of spermatogenesis arrest in azoospermic men after long-term gonadotropin treatment. Fertil Steril. 2006;86(2):466–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery Related, Faculty of Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusumachi, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan

    Noritoshi Enatsu, Koji Chiba & Masato Fujisawa

Authors
  1. Noritoshi Enatsu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Koji Chiba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Masato Fujisawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Noritoshi Enatsu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Noritoshi Enatsu, Koji Chiba, Masato Fujisawa declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human/animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Enatsu, N., Chiba, K. & Fujisawa, M. The development of surgical sperm extraction and new challenges to improve the outcome. Reprod Med Biol 15, 137–144 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12522-015-0228-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12522-015-0228-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation