Chen Q, Chen Y, Zheng Z, Tang W, Liu Z, Hong K, Lin H
Department of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Center for Reproductive Medicine, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2025 Aug 18;57(4):721-726. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2025.04.015.
To analyze the proportion of nonobstructive azoospermia (NOA) patients opting for sperm bank donation under different sperm retrieval methods [percutaneous testicular sperm aspiration (TESA), microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE)] and its influencing factors.
Retrospective data from assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles at the Center for Reproductive Medical, Peking University Third Hospital (from January 2019 to December 2023) were collected. Data-complete ART cycles involving NOA patients and their partners (using the last treatment cycle as the endpoint) were selected. Sperm donation utilization rates were compared across retrieval methods (fresh mTESE, fresh TESA, thawed mTESE, thawed TESA). Log-linear models were used to analyze the relationship between sperm retrieval method and sperm source.
Among the 1 730 couples, the overall sperm donation utilization rate was 12.66%. The highest rate occurred in the fresh mTESE group (23.42%), followed by the thawed mTESE group (5.87%). The rates for the fresh TESA and thawed TESA groups were 5.22% and 0%, respectively. Log-linear analysis demonstrated that sperm retrieval method was significantly associated with sperm source (mTESE: Estimate=4.499; TESA: Estimate=2.780; < 0.001).
The low overall sperm donation utilization rate in ART cycles may reflect the efficacy of synchronous sperm retrieval ART. The proportion of NOA patients opting for sperm donation was influenced by the retrieval method. Compared with patients undergoing TESA, those undergoing mTESE were more inclined to utilize donor sperm after retrieval failure.
分析不同取精方法(经皮睾丸精子抽吸术(TESA)、显微外科睾丸精子提取术(mTESE))下非梗阻性无精子症(NOA)患者选择精子库供精的比例及其影响因素。
收集北京大学第三医院生殖医学中心辅助生殖技术(ART)周期(2019年1月至2023年12月)的回顾性数据。选取涉及NOA患者及其伴侣且数据完整的ART周期(以最后一个治疗周期为终点)。比较不同取精方法(新鲜mTESE、新鲜TESA、解冻mTESE、解冻TESA)的精子供用率。采用对数线性模型分析取精方法与精子来源之间的关系。
在1730对夫妇中,总体精子供用率为12.66%。新鲜mTESE组的供用率最高(23.42%),其次是解冻mTESE组(5.87%)。新鲜TESA组和解冻TESA组的供用率分别为5.22%和0%。对数线性分析表明,取精方法与精子来源显著相关(mTESE:估计值=4.499;TESA:估计值=2.780;<0.001)。
ART周期中总体精子供用率较低可能反映了同步取精ART的疗效。NOA患者选择供精的比例受取精方法影响。与接受TESA的患者相比,接受mTESE的患者在取精失败后更倾向于使用供精。