1.Global Practice Patterns in the Evaluation of Non-Obstructive Azoospermia: Results of a World-Wide Survey and Expert Recommendations
Rupin SHAH ; Amarnath RAMBHATLA ; Widi ATMOKO ; Marlon MARTINEZ ; Imad ZIOUZIOU ; Priyank KOTHARI ; Nicholas TADROS ; Nguyen Ho Vinh PHUOC ; Parviz KAVOUSSI ; Ahmed HARRAZ ; Ashok AGARWAL
The World Journal of Men's Health 2024;42(4):727-748
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.
2.Global Practice Patterns in the Evaluation of Non-Obstructive Azoospermia: Results of a World-Wide Survey and Expert Recommendations
Rupin SHAH ; Amarnath RAMBHATLA ; Widi ATMOKO ; Marlon MARTINEZ ; Imad ZIOUZIOU ; Priyank KOTHARI ; Nicholas TADROS ; Nguyen Ho Vinh PHUOC ; Parviz KAVOUSSI ; Ahmed HARRAZ ; Ashok AGARWAL
The World Journal of Men's Health 2024;42(4):727-748
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.
3.Global Practice Patterns in the Evaluation of Non-Obstructive Azoospermia: Results of a World-Wide Survey and Expert Recommendations
Rupin SHAH ; Amarnath RAMBHATLA ; Widi ATMOKO ; Marlon MARTINEZ ; Imad ZIOUZIOU ; Priyank KOTHARI ; Nicholas TADROS ; Nguyen Ho Vinh PHUOC ; Parviz KAVOUSSI ; Ahmed HARRAZ ; Ashok AGARWAL
The World Journal of Men's Health 2024;42(4):727-748
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.
4.Global Practice Patterns in the Evaluation of Non-Obstructive Azoospermia: Results of a World-Wide Survey and Expert Recommendations
Rupin SHAH ; Amarnath RAMBHATLA ; Widi ATMOKO ; Marlon MARTINEZ ; Imad ZIOUZIOU ; Priyank KOTHARI ; Nicholas TADROS ; Nguyen Ho Vinh PHUOC ; Parviz KAVOUSSI ; Ahmed HARRAZ ; Ashok AGARWAL
The World Journal of Men's Health 2024;42(4):727-748
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.
5.Global Practice Patterns in the Evaluation of Non-Obstructive Azoospermia: Results of a World-Wide Survey and Expert Recommendations
Rupin SHAH ; Amarnath RAMBHATLA ; Widi ATMOKO ; Marlon MARTINEZ ; Imad ZIOUZIOU ; Priyank KOTHARI ; Nicholas TADROS ; Nguyen Ho Vinh PHUOC ; Parviz KAVOUSSI ; Ahmed HARRAZ ; Ashok AGARWAL
The World Journal of Men's Health 2024;42(4):727-748
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.
6.Impact of Varicocele Repair on Assisted Reproductive Technique Outcomes in Infertile Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Ayad PALANI ; Rossella CANNARELLA ; Ramadan SALEH ; Gianmaria SALVIO ; Ahmed M. HARRAZ ; Andrea CRAFA ; Fahmi BAHAR ; Kadir BOCU ; Naveen KUMAR ; Priyank KOTHARI ; Germar-Michael PINGGERA ; Selahittin CAYAN ; Giovanni M. COLPI ; Widi ATMOKO ; Rupin SHAH ; Ashok AGARWAL
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(2):344-348
Purpose:
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we investigated assisted reproductive technology (ART) success in infertile men with clinical varicocele and abnormal semen parameters who underwent varicocele repair (VR) before the ART procedure as compared to those who did not.
Materials and Methods:
A comprehensive search of the Scopus, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted using a specific query string to identify studies examining the impact of VR on ART outcomes, including fertilization rate, clinical pregnancy, pregnancy loss, and live-birth rate, until October 2023. Outcomes were analyzed based on the type of ART. Studies on VR in infertile men with non-obstructive azoospermia and those who underwent ART only due to female factor infertility were excluded from the study.
Results:
Out of 1,554 articles reviewed, only 9 met the inclusion criteria for the study. All the included articles were observational studies. The variability in study quality in the included literature resulted in a moderate overall risk of bias. Data analysis showed that for intrauterine insemination, there was no difference in the clinical pregnancy rate (odds ratio [OR] 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42, 2.45; p=0.97). However, for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), men with VR showed a significant improvement in fertilization rate (mean difference 10.9, 95% CI: 5.94, 15.89; p<0.01), clinical pregnancy rate (OR 1.38, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.78; p=0.01) and live-birth rate (OR 2.07, 95% CI: 1.45, 2.97; p<0.01), compared to men who did not undergo VR.
Conclusions
The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that VR has a positive impact on pregnancy and live birth rates after ICSI. However, biases like small sample sizes and heterogeneous populations highlight the need for larger, well-designed prospective studies to validate these findings.
7.Global Practice Patterns and Variations in the Medical and Surgical Management of NonObstructive Azoospermia: Results of a World-Wide Survey, Guidelines and Expert Recommendations
Amarnath RAMBHATLA ; Rupin SHAH ; Imad ZIOUZIOU ; Priyank KOTHARI ; Gianmaria SALVIO ; Murat GUL ; Taha HAMODA ; Parviz KAVOUSSI ; Widi ATMOKO ; Tuncay TOPRAK ; Ponco BIROWO ; Edmund KO ; Mohamed ARAFA ; Ramy Abou GHAYDA ; Vilvapathy Senguttuvan KARTHIKEYAN ; Giorgio Ivan RUSSO ; Germar-Michael PINGGERA ; Eric CHUNG ; Ashok AGARWAL ;
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(1):92-122
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.
8.Impact of Varicocele Repair on Assisted Reproductive Technique Outcomes in Infertile Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Ayad PALANI ; Rossella CANNARELLA ; Ramadan SALEH ; Gianmaria SALVIO ; Ahmed M. HARRAZ ; Andrea CRAFA ; Fahmi BAHAR ; Kadir BOCU ; Naveen KUMAR ; Priyank KOTHARI ; Germar-Michael PINGGERA ; Selahittin CAYAN ; Giovanni M. COLPI ; Widi ATMOKO ; Rupin SHAH ; Ashok AGARWAL
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(2):344-348
Purpose:
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we investigated assisted reproductive technology (ART) success in infertile men with clinical varicocele and abnormal semen parameters who underwent varicocele repair (VR) before the ART procedure as compared to those who did not.
Materials and Methods:
A comprehensive search of the Scopus, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted using a specific query string to identify studies examining the impact of VR on ART outcomes, including fertilization rate, clinical pregnancy, pregnancy loss, and live-birth rate, until October 2023. Outcomes were analyzed based on the type of ART. Studies on VR in infertile men with non-obstructive azoospermia and those who underwent ART only due to female factor infertility were excluded from the study.
Results:
Out of 1,554 articles reviewed, only 9 met the inclusion criteria for the study. All the included articles were observational studies. The variability in study quality in the included literature resulted in a moderate overall risk of bias. Data analysis showed that for intrauterine insemination, there was no difference in the clinical pregnancy rate (odds ratio [OR] 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42, 2.45; p=0.97). However, for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), men with VR showed a significant improvement in fertilization rate (mean difference 10.9, 95% CI: 5.94, 15.89; p<0.01), clinical pregnancy rate (OR 1.38, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.78; p=0.01) and live-birth rate (OR 2.07, 95% CI: 1.45, 2.97; p<0.01), compared to men who did not undergo VR.
Conclusions
The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that VR has a positive impact on pregnancy and live birth rates after ICSI. However, biases like small sample sizes and heterogeneous populations highlight the need for larger, well-designed prospective studies to validate these findings.
9.Global Practice Patterns and Variations in the Medical and Surgical Management of NonObstructive Azoospermia: Results of a World-Wide Survey, Guidelines and Expert Recommendations
Amarnath RAMBHATLA ; Rupin SHAH ; Imad ZIOUZIOU ; Priyank KOTHARI ; Gianmaria SALVIO ; Murat GUL ; Taha HAMODA ; Parviz KAVOUSSI ; Widi ATMOKO ; Tuncay TOPRAK ; Ponco BIROWO ; Edmund KO ; Mohamed ARAFA ; Ramy Abou GHAYDA ; Vilvapathy Senguttuvan KARTHIKEYAN ; Giorgio Ivan RUSSO ; Germar-Michael PINGGERA ; Eric CHUNG ; Ashok AGARWAL ;
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(1):92-122
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.
10.Impact of Varicocele Repair on Assisted Reproductive Technique Outcomes in Infertile Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Ayad PALANI ; Rossella CANNARELLA ; Ramadan SALEH ; Gianmaria SALVIO ; Ahmed M. HARRAZ ; Andrea CRAFA ; Fahmi BAHAR ; Kadir BOCU ; Naveen KUMAR ; Priyank KOTHARI ; Germar-Michael PINGGERA ; Selahittin CAYAN ; Giovanni M. COLPI ; Widi ATMOKO ; Rupin SHAH ; Ashok AGARWAL
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(2):344-348
Purpose:
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we investigated assisted reproductive technology (ART) success in infertile men with clinical varicocele and abnormal semen parameters who underwent varicocele repair (VR) before the ART procedure as compared to those who did not.
Materials and Methods:
A comprehensive search of the Scopus, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted using a specific query string to identify studies examining the impact of VR on ART outcomes, including fertilization rate, clinical pregnancy, pregnancy loss, and live-birth rate, until October 2023. Outcomes were analyzed based on the type of ART. Studies on VR in infertile men with non-obstructive azoospermia and those who underwent ART only due to female factor infertility were excluded from the study.
Results:
Out of 1,554 articles reviewed, only 9 met the inclusion criteria for the study. All the included articles were observational studies. The variability in study quality in the included literature resulted in a moderate overall risk of bias. Data analysis showed that for intrauterine insemination, there was no difference in the clinical pregnancy rate (odds ratio [OR] 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42, 2.45; p=0.97). However, for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), men with VR showed a significant improvement in fertilization rate (mean difference 10.9, 95% CI: 5.94, 15.89; p<0.01), clinical pregnancy rate (OR 1.38, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.78; p=0.01) and live-birth rate (OR 2.07, 95% CI: 1.45, 2.97; p<0.01), compared to men who did not undergo VR.
Conclusions
The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that VR has a positive impact on pregnancy and live birth rates after ICSI. However, biases like small sample sizes and heterogeneous populations highlight the need for larger, well-designed prospective studies to validate these findings.