English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

A controlled comparison of the efficacy and reliability of sperm retrieval by testicular fine needle aspiration (TFNA), percutaneous testicular needle biopsy (PercBiopsy) and microsurgical epididymal sperm aspiration (MESA) was performed in nine patients with obstructive azoospermia. During a planned MESA procedure, sperm retrieval was attempted on the same testis with TFNA and PercBiopsy. Spermatozoa were obtained from all patients using MESA and PercBiopsy. Spermatozoa were retrieved using TFNA from 6/9 (67%) men. The mean number of epididymal spermatozoa retrieved with MESA (15 x 106) was significantly higher (P = 0.003) than that retrieved percutaneously from the testis. The mean number of spermatozoa obtained by PercBiopsy was 0.116 x 10(6) while TFNA recovered 0.014 x 106 spermatozoa (P = 0.025). MESA is the optimal choice to retrieve the greatest number of spermatozoa with highest motility for assisted reproduction and subsequent cryopreservation. However, percutaneous testicular retrieval does not require microsurgical expertise and is less invasive. Our results suggest that the optimal percutaneous procedure for sperm retrieval from the testis involves percutaneous testicular needle biopsy with an automatic biopsy gun.

Controlled comparison of percutaneous and microsurgical sperm retrieval in men with obstructive azoospermia