Author/Authors :
Sajadi, Hesamoddin Department of Andrology - Reproductive Biomedicine Research Center- Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine - ACECR, Tehran , Hosseini, Jalil Department of Andrology - Reproductive Biomedicine Research Center- Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine - ACECR, Tehran , Farrahi, Faramarz Department of Andrology - Reproductive Biomedicine Research Center- Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine - ACECR, Tehran , Dadkhah, Farid Department of Andrology - Reproductive Biomedicine Research Center- Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine - ACECR, Tehran , Sepidarkish, Mahdi Department of Epidemiology and Reproductive Health - Reproductive Epidemiology Research Center - Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine - ACECR, Tehran , Sabbaghian, Marjan Department of Andrology - Reproductive Biomedicine Research Center- Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine - ACECR, Tehran , Eftekhari-Yazdi, Poopak Department of Embryology - Reproductive Biomedicine Research Center - Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine - ACECR, Tehran , Sadighi Gilani, Mohammad Ali Department of Andrology - Reproductive Biomedicine Research Center- Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine - ACECR, Tehran
Abstract :
Background: Assessing the net-results of microsurgical varicocelectomy in infertile men with non-obstructive azoospermic
(NOA) and clinical varicocele in five years at Royan Institute.
Materials and Methods: This is a descriptive retrospective cohort study. A backward-looking review of patients
treated for NOA and varicocele from march 2011 to march 2016 was performed. In addition, MDTESE results of 57
patients with NOA and clinical varicocele, with 537 NOA patients without varicocele were compared.
Results: Of 57 patients who underwent varicocelectomy, eight patients (14%) had sperm on sperm analysis post-operatively.
One of the eight patients was single, and one of them had spontaneous pregnancy (1/7) 14%, and one had a child
by microinjection (1/7) 14%. Out of these 8 patients, 6 had hypospermatogenesis pathology. Of 38 patients who underwent
MDTESE, 14 patients (36%) had sperm on their testis tissues, but one of them had no egg fertilization. Therefore,
the fertilization rate was (92%). Of the remaining 13 patients, 3 had live child birth (3/13) 23%. Sperm retrieval rate
(SRR) in NOA men without clinical varicocele was lower from those who had varicocele and NOA (22 vs. 36%). Also
live birth rate in NOA men with varicocelectomy was higher than NOA men without varicocele (23 vs. 11%).
Conclusion: Microsurgical varicocelectomy in NOA men may have positive effects on post-operative sperm in ejaculate
and natural or assisted pregnancies, but it seems that the effect is more significant on MDTESE results and following
successful microinjection. Meanwhile, SRR and live birth rate was higher in our patients compare to NOA men
without clinical varicocele.