{Reference Type}: Meta-Analysis
{Title}: Predictors of successful salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) after failed initial TESE in patients with non-obstructive azoospermia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
{Author}: Zhang F;Dai M;Yang X;Cheng Y;Ye L;Huang W;Chen X;Yin T;Sha Y;
{Journal}: Andrology
{Volume}: 12
{Issue}: 1
{Year}: 2024 Jan 12
{Factor}: 4.456
{DOI}: 10.1111/andr.13448
{Abstract}: <B>BACKGROUND: </B>There has been no systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze and summarize the predictive factors of successful sperm extraction in salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction.<BR><B>OBJECTIVE: </B>We aimed to investigate the factors predicting the result of salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction in patients with non-obstructive azoospermia who failed the initial microdissection testicular sperm extraction or conventional testicular sperm extraction.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for literature that described the characteristics of patients with non-obstructive azoospermia who underwent salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction after failing the initial microdissection testicular sperm extraction or conventional testicular sperm extraction published prior to June 2022.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>This meta-analysis included four retrospective studies with 332 patients with non-obstructive azoospermia who underwent a failed initial microdissection testicular sperm extraction and three retrospective studies with 177 non-obstructive azoospermia patients who underwent a failed conventional testicular sperm extraction. The results were as follows: among non-obstructive azoospermia patients whose first surgery was microdissection testicular sperm extraction, younger patients (standard mean difference: -0.28, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.55 to -0.01) and those with smaller bilateral testicular volume (standard mean difference: -0.55, 95% CI: -0.95 to -0.15), lower levels of follicle-stimulating hormone (standard mean difference: -0.86, 95% CI: -1.18 to -0.54) and luteinizing hormone (standard mean difference: -0.68, 95% CI: -1.16 to -0.19), and whose testicular histological type was hypospermatogenesis (odds ratio: 3.52, 95% CI: 1.30-9.53) were more likely to retrieve spermatozoa successfully, while patients with Sertoli-cell-only syndrome (odds ratio: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.24-0.73) were more likely to fail again in salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction. Additionally, in patients who underwent salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction after a failed initial conventional testicular sperm extraction, those with testicular histological type of hypospermatogenesis (odds ratio: 30.35, 95% CI: 8.27-111.34) were more likely to be successful, while those with maturation arrest (odds ratio: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.18-0.83) rarely benefited.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>We found that age, testicular volume, follicle-stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, hypospermatogenesis, Sertoli-cell-only syndrome, and maturation arrest were valuable predictors of salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction, which will assist andrologists in clinical decision-making and minimize unnecessary injury to patients.