Infertility is a prevalent issue affecting many couples during their reproductive years, with a significant number facing challenges in conceiving despite regular unprotected intercourse. Male factor infertility (MFI) contributes significantly to these cases, with a significant proportion of men lacking an identifiable etiology. As such, a thorough assessment of MFI has become increasingly vital for personalized management. This position paper from the Andrology team at IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele emphasizes a comprehensive and individualized approach to MFI work-up, addressing the evolving challenges encountered in clinical practice. Our approach involves a thorough diagnostic work-up to identify the underlying causes of MFI, integrating insights from extensive literature review and our proprietary data. Our data demonstrates that an extensive diagnostic assessment allows us to identify at least one underlying cause of MFI in most infertile men. However, challenges persist in diagnosing less severe phenotypes with unclear etiology. We discuss the importance of individualized MFI work-up and its implications for developing rational therapeutic protocols. Lastly, this paper highlights the necessity for a personalized diagnostic assessment, addressing the daily clinical challenges and emphasizing tailored approaches to try to improve outcomes among couples seeking first medical help for infertility.

Infertility is a prevalent issue affecting many couples during their reproductive years, with a significant number facing challenges in conceiving despite regular unprotected intercourse. Male factor infertility (MFI) contributes significantly to these cases, with a significant proportion of men lacking an identifiable etiology. As such, a thorough assessment of MFI has become increasingly vital for personalized management. This position paper from the Andrology team at IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele emphasizes a comprehensive and individualized approach to MFI work-up, addressing the evolving challenges encountered in clinical practice. Our approach involves a thorough diagnostic work-up to identify the underlying causes of MFI, integrating insights from extensive literature review and our proprietary data. Our data demonstrates that an extensive diagnostic assessment allows us to identify at least one underlying cause of MFI in most infertile men. However, challenges persist in diagnosing less severe phenotypes with unclear etiology. We discuss the importance of individualized MFI work-up and its implications for developing rational therapeutic protocols. Lastly, this paper highlights the necessity for a personalized diagnostic assessment, addressing the daily clinical challenges and emphasizing tailored approaches to try to improve outcomes among couples seeking first medical help for infertility.

Infertility is a prevalent issue affecting many couples during their reproductive years, with a significant number facing challenges in conceiving despite regular unprotected intercourse. Male factor infertility (MFI) contributes significantly to these cases, with a significant proportion of men lacking an identifiable etiology. As such, a thorough assessment of MFI has become increasingly vital for personalized management. This position paper from the Andrology team at IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele emphasizes a comprehensive and individualized approach to MFI work-up, addressing the evolving challenges encountered in clinical practice. Our approach involves a thorough diagnostic work-up to identify the underlying causes of MFI, integrating insights from extensive literature review and our proprietary data. Our data demonstrates that an extensive diagnostic assessment allows us to identify at least one underlying cause of MFI in most infertile men. However, challenges persist in diagnosing less severe phenotypes with unclear etiology. We discuss the importance of individualized MFI work-up and its implications for developing rational therapeutic protocols. Lastly, this paper highlights the necessity for a personalized diagnostic assessment, addressing the daily clinical challenges and emphasizing tailored approaches to try to improve outcomes among couples seeking first medical help for infertility.

Infertility is a prevalent issue affecting many couples during their reproductive years, with a significant number facing challenges in conceiving despite regular unprotected intercourse. Male factor infertility (MFI) contributes significantly to these cases, with a significant proportion of men lacking an identifiable etiology. As such, a thorough assessment of MFI has become increasingly vital for personalized management. This position paper from the Andrology team at IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele emphasizes a comprehensive and individualized approach to MFI work-up, addressing the evolving challenges encountered in clinical practice. Our approach involves a thorough diagnostic work-up to identify the underlying causes of MFI, integrating insights from extensive literature review and our proprietary data. Our data demonstrates that an extensive diagnostic assessment allows us to identify at least one underlying cause of MFI in most infertile men. However, challenges persist in diagnosing less severe phenotypes with unclear etiology. We discuss the importance of individualized MFI work-up and its implications for developing rational therapeutic protocols. Lastly, this paper highlights the necessity for a personalized diagnostic assessment, addressing the daily clinical challenges and emphasizing tailored approaches to try to improve outcomes among couples seeking first medical help for infertility.

Infertility is a prevalent issue affecting many couples during their reproductive years, with a significant number facing challenges in conceiving despite regular unprotected intercourse. Male factor infertility (MFI) contributes significantly to these cases, with a significant proportion of men lacking an identifiable etiology. As such, a thorough assessment of MFI has become increasingly vital for personalized management. This position paper from the Andrology team at IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele emphasizes a comprehensive and individualized approach to MFI work-up, addressing the evolving challenges encountered in clinical practice. Our approach involves a thorough diagnostic work-up to identify the underlying causes of MFI, integrating insights from extensive literature review and our proprietary data. Our data demonstrates that an extensive diagnostic assessment allows us to identify at least one underlying cause of MFI in most infertile men. However, challenges persist in diagnosing less severe phenotypes with unclear etiology. We discuss the importance of individualized MFI work-up and its implications for developing rational therapeutic protocols. Lastly, this paper highlights the necessity for a personalized diagnostic assessment, addressing the daily clinical challenges and emphasizing tailored approaches to try to improve outcomes among couples seeking first medical help for infertility.

The aim of these evidence-based guidelines is to present a consensus position from members of the Italian Unitary Society of Colon-Proctology (Società Italiana Unitaria di Colon-Proctologia, SIUCP) on the diagnosis and management of hemorrhoidal disease, with the goal of guiding physicians in the choice of the best treatment option. A panel of experts was charged by the Board of the SIUCP to develop key questions on the main topics related to the management of hemorrhoidal disease and to perform an accurate and comprehensive literature search on each topic, in order to provide evidence-based answers to the questions and to summarize them in statements. All the clinical questions were discussed by the expert panel in multiple rounds through the Delphi approach and, for each statement, a consensus among the experts was reached. The questions were created according to PICO (patients, intervention, comparison, and outcomes) criteria, and the statements were developed adopting the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) methodology. In cases of grade 1 hemorrhoidal prolapse, outpatient procedures including hemorrhoidal laser procedure and sclerotherapy may be considered the preferred surgical options. For grade 2 prolapse, nonexcisional procedures including outpatient treatments, hemorrhoidal artery ligation and mucopexy, laser hemorrhoidoplasty, the Rafaelo procedure, and stapled hemorrhoidopexy may represent the first-line treatment options, whereas excisional surgery may be considered in selected cases. In cases of grades 3 and 4, stapled hemorrhoidopexy and hemorrhoidectomy may represent the most effective procedures, even if, in the expert panel opinion, stapled hemorrhoidopexy represents the gold-standard treatment for grade 3 hemorrhoidal prolapse.

Purpose: Overall, male factor infertility (MFI) accounts for up to 50% of etiologies of couple’s infertility, with almost 30% of MFI cases being idiopathic in nature. Idiopathic MFI does not support a tailored treatment work-up in clinical practice. To investigate rates of and characteristics of men presenting for idiopathic versus unexplained primary infertility as compared with same-ethnicity, age-comparable fertile men. Materials and Methods: Demographic, clinical and laboratory data from 3,098 primary infertile men consecutively evaluated were analyzed and compared with those of 103 fertile controls. Idiopathic male infertility (IMI) was defined for abnormality at semen analysis with no previous history of diseases affecting fertility and normal findings on physical examination and genetic and laboratory testing. Unexplained male infertility (UMI) was defined as infertility of unknown origin with completely normal findings at semen analysis. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression models tested the association between clinical variables and idiopathic infertility status. Results: Overall, 570 (18.5%) and 154 (5.0%) patients depicted criteria suggestive for either IMI or UMI, respectively. Groups were similar in terms of age, BMI, CCI, recreational habits, hormonal milieu, and sperm DNA fragmentation indexes. Conversely, testicular volume was lower in IMI (p<0.001). Vitamin D3 levels were lower in IMI vs. UMI vs. fertile controls (p=0.01). At multivariable logistic regression analysis only vitamin D3 deficiency (OR, 9.67; p=0.03) was associated with IMI. Characteristics suggestive for IMI versus UMI were observed in almost 20% and 5% of men, respectively. Overall, clinical differences between groups were slightly significant and certainly not supportive of a tailored management work-up. Conclusions Current findings further support the urgent need of a more detailed and comprehensive assessment of infertile men to better tailoring their management work-up in the everyday clinical setting.

Objective: This study investigates the specific morbidity of rectosigmoid resection (RSR) during Visceral-Peritoneal Debulking (VPD) in a consecutive series of patients with stage IIIC-IV ovarian cancer and compares the results of the colo-rectal vs. the gynaecologic oncology team. Methods: All patients with the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIC–IV ovarian cancer who had VPD and RSR were included in the study.Between 2009 and 2013 all operations were performed by the gynecologic oncology team alone (group 1). Since 2013 the RSR was performed by the colorectal team together with the gynecologic oncologist (group 2). All pre-operative information and surgical details were compared to exclude significant bias. Intra- and post-operative morbidity events were recorded and compared between groups. Results: One hundred and sixty-two patients had a RSR during VPD, 93 in group 1 and 69 in group 2. Groups were comparable for all pre-operative features other than: albumin (1<2) hemoglobin (2<1) and up-front surgery (1>2). Overall morbidity was 33% vs. 40% (p=0.53), bowel specific morbidity 11.8% vs. 11.5% (p=0.81), anastomotic leak 4.1% vs. 6.1% (p=0.43) and re-operation rate 9.6% vs. 6.1% (p=0.71) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. None of them were significantly different. The rate of bowel diversion was 36.5% in group 1 vs. 46.3% in group 2 (p=0.26). Conclusions Our study failed to demonstrate any significant difference in the morbidity rate of RSR based on the team performing the surgery. These data warrant further investigation as they are interesting with regards to education, finance, and medico-legal aspects.