A comparative study of three techniques for the analysis of sperm recovery: touch-print cytology, wet preparation, and testicular histopathology

精子回收分析的三种技术比较研究:指纹细胞学、湿片法和睾丸组织病理学

阅读:1

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of simultaneous testicular touch-print cytology, testicular histopathology, and wet preparation in nonobstructive azoospermic (NOA) males. METHODS: Three hundred and sixty-three males with NOA underwent a multiple testicular sampling prior to ICSI for histopathologic evaluation, diagnostic testicular sperm extraction, and simultaneous touch-print cytology to evaluate sperm presence or absence. A total of 979 testicular samples were taken. RESULTS: Sperm recovery was achieved in 106 cases (29.2%). Patients with hypospermatogenesis and focal spermatogenesis needed 2.8 and 5.9 biopsies, respectively, to retrieve spermatozoa, while in patients with germ cell aplasia and maturation arrest, even after eight to nine samples no spermatozoa were recovered. Neither the FSH levels nor the testicular volume was found to be significant in the prediction of sperm recovery. If only a single testis was to be biopsied, 25% of the cases with sperm recovery would have been missed. The combination of touch-print cytology with histopathology and wet preparation increased the accuracy of spermatozoa identification. CONCLUSION: Touch-print cytology was found to be more predictive than wet preparation in the diagnosis of spermatogenesis; moreover, it was found to be a quick and easy technique providing an accurate diagnosis in prediction of sperm recovery.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。