Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Andrology: Epididymal sperm aspiration with assisted reproductive techniques: Difference between congenital and acquired obstructive azoospermia?

  • C. S. Chen*
  • , S. H. Chu
  • , Y. K. Soong
  • , Y. M. Lai
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • Chang Gung Memorial Hospital

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal Article peer-review

20 Scopus citations

Abstract

From July 1992 to May 1994, 31 cases of obstructive azoospermia-induced infertility underwent 35 epididymal sperm aspiration procedures and assisted reproductive techniques. These included in-vitro fertilization (IVF), zygote intra-Fallopian transfer (ZIFT), subzonal insemination (SUZI) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) with embryo transfer or tubal embryo transfer. The motile spermatozoa were retrieved using a gauge 24 Medicut cannula and flush medium. Total oocyte fertilization rate was 23.4% and the clinical pregnancy rate was 12.5% (four out of 32 treatment cycles). Congenital absence of the vas deferens was found in 16 cases (51.6%) and secondary genital duct obstruction was present in 15 cases (48.4%). In all, 29 aspirations were retrieved from the caput of the epididymis and six from the epididymal body or tail. The fertilization rate for the caput spermatozoa was much less than that for other areas of the epididymis (P < 0.05). Though there were no predictable differences in fertilization rates between the congenital and acquired groups, by using epididymal spermatozoa for assisted reproduction, the congenital group seemed to have a stronger tendency to achieve pregnancy (20 versus 5.9%).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1104-1108
Number of pages5
JournalHuman Reproduction
Volume10
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - 05 1995
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Assisted reproductive technique
  • Epididymal spermatozoa

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Andrology: Epididymal sperm aspiration with assisted reproductive techniques: Difference between congenital and acquired obstructive azoospermia?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this