Skip to main content

Adolescent Testicular Sperm Retrieval

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 539 Accesses

Abstract

A 16-year-old male presented to a community hospital with 2 weeks of decreased urinary flow, which ultimately progressed to urinary retention. An indwelling Foley catheter was placed, and initial evaluation revealed no laboratory abnormalities. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the abdomen and pelvis demonstrated an enhancing mass within the anterior prostate measuring 4.2 × 5.2 × 4.6 cm. A right femoral head lesion was also noted. Percutaneous biopsy of the prostatic lesion confirmed a diagnosis of embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma, and further staging evaluation revealed Stage 4, high-risk disease. The patient was transferred to a tertiary-care pediatric hospital for treatment with the following chemotherapeutic regimen: vincristine, irinotecan, ifosfamide, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, dactinomycin, and human IgG1 monoclonal antibody. The total cyclophosphamide equivalent dose (CED) for the planned treatment regimen was 16,290 mg/m2.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Schover LR, Brey K, Lichtin A, Lipshultz LI, Jeha S. Knowledge and experience regarding cancer, infertility, and sperm banking in younger male survivors. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(7):1880–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Schover LR, Brey K, Lichtin A, Lipshultz LI, Jeha S. Oncologists’ attitudes and practices regarding banking sperm before cancer treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(7):1890–7.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Oktay K, Harvey BE, Partridge AH, Quinn GP, Reinecke J, Taylor HS, et al. Fertility preservation in patients with cancer: ASCO clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(19):1994–2001.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. van Casteren NJ, Dohle GR, Romijn JC, de Muinck Keizer-Schrama SMPF, Weber RFA, van den Heuvel-Eibrink MM. Semen cryopreservation in pubertal boys before gonadotoxic treatment and the role of endocrinologic evaluation in predicting sperm yield. Fertil Steril. 2008;90(4):1119–25.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Nielsen CT, Skakkebaek NE, Richardson DW, Darling JA, Hunter WM, Jørgensen M, et al. Onset of the release of spermatozoa (spermarche) in boys in relation to age, testicular growth, pubic hair, and height. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1986;62(3):532–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Schmiegelow ML, Sommer P, Carlsen E, Sønksen JO, Schmiegelow K, Müller JR. Penile vibratory stimulation and electroejaculation before anticancer therapy in two pubertal boys. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 1998;20(5):429–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Meng X, Fan L, Wang T, Wang S, Wang Z, Liu J. Electroejaculation combined with assisted reproductive technology in psychogenic anejaculation patients refractory to penile vibratory stimulation. Transl Androl Urol. 2018;7(Suppl 1):S17–22.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Gat I, Toren A, Hourvitz A, Raviv G, Band G, Baum M, et al. Sperm preservation by electroejaculation in adolescent cancer patients. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2014;61(2):286–90.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Adank MC, van Dorp W, Smit M, van Casteren NJ, Laven JSE, Pieters R, et al. Electroejaculation as a method of fertility preservation in boys diagnosed with cancer: a single-center experience and review of the literature. Fertil Steril. 2014;102(1):199–205.e1.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Berookhim BM, Mulhall JP. Outcomes of operative sperm retrieval strategies for fertility preservation among males scheduled to undergo cancer treatment. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(3):805–11.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. 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 Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Smart E, Lopes F, Rice S, Nagy B, Anderson RA, Mitchell RT, et al. Chemotherapy drugs cyclophosphamide, cisplatin and doxorubicin induce germ cell loss in an in vitro model of the prepubertal testis. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):1773.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Green DM, Liu W, Kutteh WH, Ke RW, Shelton KC, Sklar CA, et al. Cumulative alkylating agent exposure and semen parameters in adult survivors of childhood cancer: a report from the St Jude Lifetime Cohort Study. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(11):1215–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Grewenig A, Schuler N, Rübe CE. Persistent DNA damage in spermatogonial stem cells after fractionated low-dose irradiation of testicular tissue. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015;92(5):1123–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Carlsen E, Andersson A-M, Petersen JH, Skakkebaek NE. History of febrile illness and variation in semen quality. Hum Reprod. 2003;18(10):2089–92.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Trottmann M, Becker AJ, Stadler T, Straub J, Soljanik I, Schlenker B, et al. Semen quality in men with malignant diseases before and after therapy and the role of cryopreservation. Eur Urol. 2007;52(2):355–67.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Hsiao W, Stahl PJ, Osterberg EC, Nejat E, Palermo GD, Rosenwaks Z, et al. Successful treatment of postchemotherapy azoospermia with microsurgical testicular sperm extraction: the Weill Cornell experience. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(12):1607–11.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Byrne J, Rasmussen SA, Steinhorn SC, Connelly RR, Myers MH, Lynch CF, et al. Genetic disease in offspring of long-term survivors of childhood and adolescent cancer. Am J Hum Genet. 1998;62(1):45–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Depalo R, Falagario D, Masciandaro P, Nardelli C, Vacca MP, Capuano P, et al. Fertility preservation in males with cancer: 16-year monocentric experience of sperm banking and post-thaw reproductive outcomes. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2016;8(6):412–20.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Chiba K, Tanaka M, Ishida T, Sumii K, Fukuda T, Okada K, et al. Mp07-18 the usage rate of semen cryopreservation before cancer treatment. J Urol. 2018;199(4):e94–5.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barbara A. Lockart .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Review Questions and Answers

Review Questions and Answers

  1. Q1.

    What is the dose-dependent impact of chemotherapy and radiotherapy upon long-term fertility potential?

  2. A1.

    Spermatogonia and spermatogonial stem cells are highly chemosensitive, rendering these cells vulnerable to a variety of chemotherapeutic agents [12]. The deleterious effect on spermatogenesis is most pronounced among the alkylating agents, where there is a dose-dependent risk of gonadotoxicity with increasing cumulative doses. The cyclophosphamide equivalent dose (CED) has emerged as the best predictor of long-term fertility in men who receive therapy with alkylating agents [13]. Normospermia is typically seen in patients with CED less than 4000 mg/m2, though approximately 10% of patients with this low-dose exposure will have either oligospermia or azoospermia. Radiation therapy also impairs spermatogenesis by inducing DNA damage or apoptosis in spermatogonia [14]. Spermatogenesis may be impaired with doses as low as 0.15 Gy. Reversible azoospermia can result from doses of 0.35 Gy, and permanent azoospermia typically results from cumulative doses of >2.5 Gy. Semen parameters nadir approximately 4–6 months after therapy, and recovery of spermatogenesis, when present, may occur up to 18 months following treatment [15, 16].

  3. Q2.

    What are the outcomes of sperm retrieval if non-obstructive azoospermia persists after conclusion of therapy?

  4. A2.

    MicroTESE is the preferred approach to non-obstructive azoospermia in this setting, as it typically yields higher success than conventional TESE [17]. In men with azoospermia secondary to alkylating agents, microTESE has a 37% success rate for sperm retrieval [18].

  5. Q3.

    What is the risk of birth defects in the offspring of men with a history of cancer?

  6. A3.

    For men receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy, there may be concern regarding transmission of germline mutations to future offspring. A large study of adult cancer survivors found no difference in the incidence of cytogenetic syndromes, single-gene disorders, and simple malformations between the offspring of cancer survivors and those of healthy controls (3.4% versus 3.1%) [19]. Nonetheless, patients are typically encouraged to defer family planning until approximately 1–2 years after completion of therapy in order to reduce the perceived risk of transient DNA damage or aneuploidy during the period immediately following therapy.

  7. Q4.

    What are the success rates with use of cryopreserved sperm for assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in patients with malignancy?

  8. A4.

    For men who do not have return of sperm in the ejaculate after the completion of cancer therapy, cryopreserved sperm are typically used for efforts at conception with in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). The IVF success rates for patients banking sperm prior to cancer therapy are quite good, with one study reporting fertilization rates up to 71.4%, though these rates were lower among men with specific malignancies such as testis cancer or lymphoma [20]. An additional series reported a 66% live birth rate when cryopreserved sperm were used for IVF and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) [21].

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Huang, IS., Brannigan, R.E., Lockart, B.A. (2019). Adolescent Testicular Sperm Retrieval. In: Woodruff, T., Shah, D., Vitek, W. (eds) Textbook of Oncofertility Research and Practice. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02868-8_56

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02868-8_56

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-02867-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-02868-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics