Non-obstructive AzoospermiaNCT03550716
Surgical Sperm Retrieval in Non-obstructive Azoospermic Men: mTESE vs. TESA
A study testing mTESE and TESA in people with Non-obstructive Azoospermia, run by Herlev and Gentofte Hospital at 4 sites in 2 countries.
Trial summary
Infertility is a significant social- and health problem in the Western World and at the moment in Denmark one in ten babies are born with the help of assisted reproduction. In 50% of infertile couples a male factor can be identified as a contributing cause (1). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 70 years, men only
- Conditions the study is for
- Non-obstructive Azoospermia
- What is being tested?
- mTESE and TESA
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion, Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 110 participants
- Where
- 4 sitesin 2 countries
- Study dates
- 1 Apr 2017to 30 Apr 2021
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 70 years
- Men only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Azoospermia verified in at least two semen samples within the past six months, including assessment of the centrifuged pellet as per the WHO 5th edition (13)
- Testis volume (Prader's orchidometer) ≤ 15ml on both sides
- No indication of obstructive causes of azoospermia in medical history or physical examination (ex. absent vas deferens, vasectomy, scrotal trauma/injury, hernia repair or other operations potentially damaging the vas deferens)
- Capable and legally competent individual
Who cannot join
- Previous attempts of surgical sperm retrieval
- Previous testicular biopsy
- Anejaculation
- Retrograde ejaculation
- Bleeding disorders rendering surgery too high a risk
- Klinefelters Syndrome
Show all 13Show fewer
- XX male
- AZFa/b microdeletion
- CFTR mutation
- Inability to understand and/or stick to the written information
- Patients not deemed suitable for general anesthesia
- A patient can at any time during the study withdraw their consent of participation
- Normal histology on testis biopsy following TESA or mTESE
Trial locations and contacts
4 sites in 2 countries.
4 sites in 2 countries
Denmark3 sites
Rigshospitalet
Copenhagen, DK-2100
Herlev and Gentofte Hospital
Herlev, DK-2730
Holbæk Sygehus
Holbæk, DK-4300
About this study
Official title: Surgical Sperm Retrieval in Non-obstructive Azoospermic Men: Microdissection Testicular Sperm Extraction vs. Multiple Needle-pass Percutaneous Testicular Sperm Aspiration
Infertility is a significant social- and health problem in the Western World and at the moment in Denmark one in ten babies are born with the help of assisted reproduction. In 50% of infertile couples a male factor can be identified as a contributing cause (1).
Azoospermia is defined as the absence of spermatozoa in the ejaculate and it is a condition affecting 10-15% of infertile men (2, 3). Azoospermia is divided into obstructive azoospermia (OA) and nonobstructive azoospermia (NOA) of which the latter constitutes 60% (2, 3). In NOA the production of spermatozoa in the testis is either absent or markedly decreased.
Read more
Since 1999 microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) has become the preferred treatment option for NOA in many centers worldwide (4). The procedure is performed in general anesthesia using an operating microscope to carefully examine the entire testicular tissue for the presence of spermatozoa which can be used for assisted reproduction.
An alternative to mTESE is a percutaneous testicular sperm aspiration (TESA) or needle biopsy. This procedure is simple to perform using a biopsy needle to aspirate testicular tissue. The aspirated tissue is examined for the presence of spermatozoa that can be used in assisted reproduction.
Today there is no robust evidence on the optimal sperm retrieval protocol on men with NOA. This is in part due to the fact that no randomized trials have been performed to compare procedures. This study is the first to randomize procedures for surgical sperm retrieval.
Hypothesis In men with NOA, the investigators hypothesize that TESA is a viable first line approach compared to mTESE in regards to success rates of finding spermatozoa, complication rates and pregnancy outcomes.
A total of 110 men will be randomized to either mTESE or TESA and the rates of finding spermatozoa will be compared. However, for ethical reasons, because some believe mTESE have a greater chance of finding sperm cells, all men with a failed TESA will have a mTESE afterwards.
Read the detailed description
Background Infertility is a significant social- and health problem in the Western World and at the moment in Denmark one in ten babies are born with the help of assisted reproduction. In 50% of infertile couples a male factor can be identified as a contributing cause (1).
Azoospermia is defined as the absence of spermatozoa in the ejaculate and it is a condition affecting 10-15% of infertile men (2, 3). Azoospermia is divided into obstructive azoospermia (OA) and nonobstructive azoospermia (NOA) of which the latter constitutes 60% (2, 3). In NOA the production of spermatozoa in the testis is either absent or markedly decreased.
Since 1999 microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) has become the preferred treatment option for NOA in many centers worldwide (4). The procedure is performed in general anesthesia using an operating microscope to carefully examine the entire testicular tissue for the presence of spermatozoa which can be used for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). The advantages of mTESE include high sperm retrieval rates (SRR), in recent systematic reviews reported around 52% (5-8), and low reported complication rates (9-11). However mTESE is a time-consuming invasive procedure requiring the right expertise, the right equipment and a proper setup of the fertility clinic.
An alternative to mTESE is a percutaneous testicular sperm aspiration (TESA). This procedure is simple to perform using a biopsy needle to aspirate testicular tissue. The aspirated tissue is examined for the presence of spermatozoa and SRR for this procedure is usually reported around 25% (5-8). The lower SRR compared to mTESE is the main limitation of this method, but the procedure is well tolerated by patients and due to its simplicity and short duration it can easily be performed in the out-patient clinic. In collaboration with University of Michigan the TESA technique has been improved by using an 18 gauge needle and performing multiple (50-100) passes throughout the entire testicular tissue while applying a vacuum. In the remainder of this document this multiple needle-pass TESA will be referred to as "TESA". Recently the investigators retrospectively evaluated this approach and found a SRR of 30% using TESA and interestingly the SRR of mTESE following a failed TESA was only 11% (12).
However, there is no robust evidence on the optimal sperm retrieval protocol on men with NOA. This is in part due to the fact that no randomized trials have been performed to compare the two procedures. Often patients from different countries are required to pay the infertility treatment themselves and the cost for a TESA is around $500 while a mTESE is around $8.000. This makes it difficult to perform a randomized trial in most countries but because of the public health systems of Denmark and Sweden there is a unique possibility to be the first in the world to do a randomized trial on this matter.
Hypothesis In men with NOA, the investigators hypothesize that TESA is a viable first line approach compared to mTESE in regards to SRR, complication rates and pregnancy outcomes.
Screening and randomization Potential study patients and their partners will initially be identified in their work-up during their infertility treatment. When a patient is identified as having NOA, the patient will be screened according to inclusion- and exclusion criteria. If these are met and the patient provides an informed consent for participation, the patient is included and randomized to undergo mTESE or TESA. Patients will be recruited from the fertility clinics at Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Malmö University Hospital, Holbaek Hospital and Rigshospitalet in collaboration with Department of Growth and Reproduction, Rigshospitalet.
Planning the treatment and surgery Treatment of the infertile couples will follow regular treatment protocols at the respective fertility clinics. This includes freezing retrieved sperm cells and thawing them in relation to the oocyte retrieval. As an alternative to sperm cell freezing, retrieved oocytes will be frozen and thawed in relation to the surgical sperm retrieval. The aim is to have 6-8 oocytes stored before operation for couples following this route. All patients will undergo full anesthesia. If the patient is randomized to TESA and this fails, then a salvage mTESE can be done immediately while in the operating theatre.
Visits Before visit 1 all patients and their partners will have received written and oral information on the study and will have had time to provide an informed consent.
At visit 1 patients and possibly their partners (mandatory in cases of oocyte cryopreservation) meet with the primary investigator. It will be secured that an informed consent for participation is signed. The focus of visit 1 will be on accessing the men's evaluation leading to the NOA diagnosis and checking inclusion- and exclusion criteria. In addition, information regarding medical history will be obtained and a physical examination of the external genitalia will be carried out. Patients will fill out questionnaires on psychosexual health and pain before the visit and their answers will be reviewed together. A blood sample will be taken for the purpose of measuring hormone levels and for storage in the biobank. Likewise patients will bring a semen sample for storage in the biobank. If not previously done patients will be tested with regards to karyotype, AzF microdeletions and CFTR mutations if deemed necessary.
Visit 2 will be the actual procedure. Follow-up is comprised by patients filling out the mentioned questionnaires, reporting any complications and having a blood sample drawn at visit 3 and 4. Follow-up will primarily be done by phone/mail, but at visit 3 and 4 patients will have to go to the Department of Growth and Reproduction, Rigshospitalet (for Danish patients) or the fertility clinic at Malmö University Hospital (for Swedish patients) to have blood samples drawn. Samples collected in Sweden will be send for analysis at the Department of Growth and Reproduction, Rigshospitalet. Pregnancy outcome will be reported by phone/mail 9-15 months after the procedure is done.
Biobank A research biobank will be made containing blood samples, semen and testicular tissue. Blood samples will be used for genotyping and to measure relevant biomarkers including piRNAs, miRNAs, protein markers and biochemical markers. Semen will also be used to measure relevant biomarkers. Testicular tissue will be used for testing for molecular and biochemical markers of spermatogenesis and to measure intratesticular testosterone levels. Additionally testicular tissue showing maturation arrest will be used for attempts to maturate germ cells in vitro (not to be used for fertilization, only research). The purpose of the above is to find markers of successful sperm retrieval and to get a better understanding of the biology of NOA and potentially to develop pharmacological strategies in the future for treating certain forms of NOA as e.g. maturations arrest.
Safety and adverse events:
Hematoma As TESA/ mTESE is a surgery there is a risk of post-operative bleeding leading to scrotal or spermatic cord hematomas. Estimated risk <1,5%.
Infection As TESA/ mTESE is a surgery there is a risk of infection. Estimated risk <1% Pain Pain is expected to occur after both procedures but especially after mTESE Drop in testosterone level In the litterature this is reported as a transient event following mTESE however there is a risk of more lasting androgen deficiency. Careful surgical techniques will be used to limit the amount of tissue damage.
Possible disadvantages:
Lower SRR following TESA SRR are reported lower for TESA compared to mTESE. For this reason patients with an unsuccessful TESA will be offered a salvage mTESE Oocyte cryopreservation In the past fertilization outcomes after cryopreservation have been lower compared to fresh oocytes. However with the evolution of cryopreservation techniques (vitrification) IVF pregnancy rates with the use of cryopreserved oocytes are now similar to those of fresh oocytes. (15) Grading of complications Complications will be graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications (14).
Ethical evaluation This study will follow the newest edition of the Helsinki Declaration and at all times follow applicable laws. It will be reported to "Datatilsynet", "Videnskabsetisk komite" and the "Ethical Committee of Lund University".
Some of the ethical aspects related to this project have been briefly described in the safety and adverse events section. Both mTESE and TESA are safe procedures and although the investigators previously found a higher complication rate with mTESE compared to TESA (12), the general literature describe both procedures with comparable risks related to infection and hematomas.
To make the study possible to complete, either the sperm cells or the oocytes retrieved from the women will have to undergo cryopreservation. Sperm cell cryopreservation is standard practice at the fertility clinics today. Previously only fresh oocytes were used for in-vitro fertilization but recently it has been shown that treatment using cryopreserved oocytes give similar pregnancy rates to those of fresh oocytes. Thus freezing the oocytes should not be a disadvantage to the couples.
When looking at sperm retrieval rates, mTESE has until now been superior to TESA. However with the improved TESA results are expected to be more equal. In addition patients randomized to TESA will have the benefit of a more simple and less invasive treatment compared to mTESE. Moreover patients randomized to TESA will be provided with an option to receive a salvage mTESE that can be carried out the same day because all patients will undergo full anesthesia. In this way all patients included in the study will receive equal treatment options for NOA.
Attempts of maturation of germ cells in vitro will be made using tissue with partial or total maturation arrest. If successful, the germ cells maturated in vitro will not be used for any attempt of fertilization but only as "proof of concept" regarding treatment of azoospermia due to maturation arrest.
In a broader picture this project will be the first randomized study on this matter and therefore it will bring a clearer picture on which is the optimal sperm retrieval technique for men with NOA. This will benefit many patients with NOA in the future.
Publication of results:
Results from the study will be published in international peer-reviewed scientific journals, national journals and hospital websites. This will happen no matter the outcome of the study meaning that both positive, negative and inconclusive results will be made public. Additionally results will be presented at conferences and meetings. All published results will be made anonymous.
- Conditions
- Non-obstructive Azoospermia
- Being tested
- mTESE, TESA
- Keywords
- azoospermia, microdissection testicular sperm extraction, testicular sperm aspiration, male infertility, surgical sperm retrieval
- Medical subject headings
- Azoospermia, Infertility, Male
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
mTESEProcedure or surgery
Also called Microdissection testicular sperm extraction
mTESE is performed according to the initial description by Schlegel (4). General anesthesia is used. Midline incision of the scrotum is made and carried down to the level of the tunica vaginalis, which is opened to deliver the testis. Equatorial incision is made and the testis bivalved. The operating microscope is used to identify plump-appearing seminiferous tubules, and biopsies are taken from these areas. These samples are examined by an embryologist in the operating room after initial gross dispersion by passing the tissue through a 24G angiocatheter. The procedure is stopped if spermatozoa are found. If no plump tubules are found, random biopsies targeting every area of the testis are taken. If necessary the procedure is carried out on the contralateral testis. Hemostasis is obtained with careful bipolar cautery, and the tunica albuginea and the tunica vaginalis are closed with a running 4-0 Vicryl. Standard scrotal closure is performed and gentle pressure dressing is applied.
TESAProcedure or surgery
Also called Percutaneous testicular sperm aspiration
In general anesthesia an 18 gauge needle is introduced into each testis, and negative pressure applied with a 10 ml syringe. Multiple passes throughout the entire testis, numbering 50-100 passes, are made through a single percutaneous/tunical entry and continued until tissue is visible in the hub of the needle. This is removed by brisk extraction of the needle and pressure held to tamponade bleeding. The aspirated tissue is examined by an embryologist in the operating room after initial gross dispersion by passing the tissue through a 24 gauge angiocatheter.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| mTESE | Active comparator | Patients randomized to mTESE Receives: Procedure: mTESE |
| TESA | Active comparator | Patients randomized to TESA Receives: Procedure: TESA |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Sperm retrieval rate
Rate of succesful sperm retrievals defined as at least one spermatozoa found suitable for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)
Measured: Assessed immediately after the procedure
Secondary outcomes (25)
Conversion rate to mTESE
Rate of conversion from TESA to mTESE in the TESA group
Measured: Recorded immediately after the procedure
Sperm retrieval rate after salvage mTESE
Rate of succesful sperm retrievals following salvage mTESE
Measured: Recorded immediately after the procedure
Complication rates
Any complication after surgery
Measured: Recorded in the first 6 months after surgery
Pregnancy outcomes
Fertilization rate (per injected oocyte), chemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate (per IVF cycle)
Measured: Recorded in the first 9-15 months after surgery
Difference in perceived stress scale (PSS) score
The validated questionnaire PSS measures the perception of stress. The scale range is 0-40 with a higher score indicating more perceived stress.
Measured: Three months before to three months after surgery
Difference in PainDetect pain scale score
Based on the validated questionnaire PainDetect. The scale range is 0-38 with a higher score indicating a larger neuropathic pain component
Measured: Three months before to three months after surgery
Difference in pain score - Visual Analog Scale
Pain reported on the visual analog scale with the range 0-10. A higher score indicates more pain.
Measured: Three months before to three months after surgery
Difference in erectile function score
Based on the validated questionnaire the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5). The scale range is 5-25 with a higher score indicating a better erectile function.
Measured: Three months before to three months after surgery
Difference in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores - subscale anxiety.
Anxiety measured with the validated questionnaire HADS. The subscale range is 0-21 with a higher score indicating more anxiety.
Measured: Three months before to three months after surgery
Difference in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores - subscale depression.
Depression measured with the validated questionnaire HADS. The subscale range is 0-21 with a higher score indicating more depresssion.
Measured: Three months before to three months after surgery
Difference in Short-Form 12-item Survery (SF-12) mental health summary score
Mental Health Composite Scores (MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health.
Measured: Three months before to three months after surgery
Difference in Short-Form 12-item Survery (SF-12) physical health summary score
Physical Health Composite Scores (PCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of Health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health.
Measured: Three months before to three months after surgery
Age as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Age
Measured: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Body Mass Index (BMI) as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
BMI
Measured: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Testis histology as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Testis Histology
Measured: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Testis size as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Testis size
Measured: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Biomarkers as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Relevant (not identified yet) biomarkers in blood, seminal fluid and/or testicular tissue,
Measured: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Intra-testicular testosterone level as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Intra-testicular testosterone level
Measured: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
FSH as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Baseline Follicle-stimulating hormone level
Measured: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
LH as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Baseline Luteinizing hormone level
Measured: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Testosterone as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Baseline Testosterone level
Measured: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Inhibin B as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Baseline Inhibin B level
Measured: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
AMH as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Baseline Anti-Müllerian hormone level
Measured: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Estradiol as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Baseline Estradiol level
Measured: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Prolactin as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Baseline Prolactin level
Measured: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted8 Jun 2018
- Study start1 Apr 2017
- Primary completion30 Oct 2020
- Study completion30 Apr 2021
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (15)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Non-obstructive AzoospermiaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Trial type: Clinical randomized multi-center controlled trial Randomization: Block randomization is performed with the use of a computer generated block randomization list Participants: Patients with NOA undergoing fertility treatment
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 110 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Herlev and Gentofte Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Holbaek Sygehus, Skane University Hospital, University of Michigan
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Christian Fuglesang S. Jensen, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03550716
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- H-16033784
- Status last verified
- Sep 2021
- First submitted
- 14 May 2018
- Last updated
- 10 Sep 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
Sharlip ID, Jarow JP, Belker AM, Lipshultz LI, Sigman M, Thomas AJ, Schlegel PN, Howards SS, Nehra A, Damewood MD, Overstreet JW, Sadovsky R. Best practice policies for male infertility. Fertil Steril. 2002 May;77(5):873-82. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(02)03105-9. No abstract available.
PubMed 12009338Jarow JP, Espeland MA, Lipshultz LI. Evaluation of the azoospermic patient. J Urol. 1989 Jul;142(1):62-5. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)38662-7.
PubMed 2499695Willott GM. Frequency of azoospermia. Forensic Sci Int. 1982 Jul-Aug;20(1):9-10. doi: 10.1016/0379-0738(82)90099-8. No abstract available.
PubMed 7095683Schlegel PN. Testicular sperm extraction: microdissection improves sperm yield with minimal tissue excision. Hum Reprod. 1999 Jan;14(1):131-5. doi: 10.1093/humrep/14.1.131.
PubMed 10374109Dabaja AA, Schlegel PN. Microdissection testicular sperm extraction: an update. Asian J Androl. 2013 Jan;15(1):35-9. doi: 10.1038/aja.2012.141. Epub 2012 Dec 17.
PubMed 23241638Deruyver Y, Vanderschueren D, Van der Aa F. Outcome of microdissection TESE compared with conventional TESE in non-obstructive azoospermia: a systematic review. Andrology. 2014 Jan;2(1):20-4. doi: 10.1111/j.2047-2927.2013.00148.x. Epub 2013 Nov 6.
PubMed 24193894Donoso P, Tournaye H, Devroey P. Which is the best sperm retrieval technique for non-obstructive azoospermia? A systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2007 Nov-Dec;13(6):539-49. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmm029. Epub 2007 Sep 24.
PubMed 17895238Bernie AM, Mata DA, Ramasamy R, Schlegel PN. Comparison of microdissection testicular sperm extraction, conventional testicular sperm extraction, and testicular sperm aspiration for nonobstructive azoospermia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2015 Nov;104(5):1099-103.e1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.07.1136. Epub 2015 Aug 8.
PubMed 26263080Amer M, Ateyah A, Hany R, Zohdy W. Prospective comparative study between microsurgical and conventional testicular sperm extraction in non-obstructive azoospermia: follow-up by serial ultrasound examinations. Hum Reprod. 2000 Mar;15(3):653-6. doi: 10.1093/humrep/15.3.653.
PubMed 10686214Okada H, Dobashi M, Yamazaki T, Hara I, Fujisawa M, Arakawa S, Kamidono S. Conventional versus microdissection testicular sperm extraction for nonobstructive azoospermia. J Urol. 2002 Sep;168(3):1063-7. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64575-2.
PubMed 12187223Ramasamy R, Yagan N, Schlegel PN. Structural and functional changes to the testis after conventional versus microdissection testicular sperm extraction. Urology. 2005 Jun;65(6):1190-4. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2004.12.059.
PubMed 15922422Jensen CF, Ohl DA, Hiner MR, Fode M, Shah T, Smith GD, Sonksen J. Multiple needle-pass percutaneous testicular sperm aspiration as first-line treatment in azoospermic men. Andrology. 2016 Mar;4(2):257-62. doi: 10.1111/andr.12143. Epub 2016 Jan 20.
PubMed 26789006WHO laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen. World Health Organization. 2010;5th ed.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae.
PubMed 15273542Argyle CE, Harper JC, Davies MC. Oocyte cryopreservation: where are we now? Hum Reprod Update. 2016 Jun;22(4):440-9. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmw007. Epub 2016 Mar 22.
PubMed 27006004
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 10 Sep 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Surgical Sperm Retrieval in Non-obstructive Azoospermic Men: Microdissection Testicular Sperm Extraction vs. Multiple Needle-pass Percutaneous Testicular Sperm Aspiration
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03550716
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- H-16033784
- Conditions
- Non-obstructive Azoospermia
- Keywords
- azoospermia, microdissection testicular sperm extraction, testicular sperm aspiration, male infertility, surgical sperm retrieval
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 110 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Herlev and Gentofte HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Holbaek Sygehus, Skane University Hospital, University of Michigan
- Study start
- 1 Apr 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Oct 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Apr 2021 (actual)
- First posted
- 8 Jun 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Infertility is a significant social- and health problem in the Western World and at the moment in Denmark one in ten babies are born with the help of assisted reproduction. In 50% of infertile couples a male factor can be identified as a contributing cause (1).
Azoospermia is defined as the absence of spermatozoa in the ejaculate and it is a condition affecting 10-15% of infertile men (2, 3). Azoospermia is divided into obstructive azoospermia (OA) and nonobstructive azoospermia (NOA) of which the latter constitutes 60% (2, 3). In NOA the production of spermatozoa in the testis is either absent or markedly decreased.
Since 1999 microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) has become the preferred treatment option for NOA in many centers worldwide (4). The procedure is performed in general anesthesia using an operating microscope to carefully examine the entire testicular tissue for the presence of spermatozoa which can be used for assisted reproduction.
An alternative to mTESE is a percutaneous testicular sperm aspiration (TESA) or needle biopsy. This procedure is simple to perform using a biopsy needle to aspirate testicular tissue. The aspirated tissue is examined for the presence of spermatozoa that can be used in assisted reproduction.
Today there is no robust evidence on the optimal sperm retrieval protocol on men with NOA. This is in part due to the fact that no randomized trials have been performed to compare procedures. This study is the first to randomize procedures for surgical sperm retrieval.
Hypothesis In men with NOA, the investigators hypothesize that TESA is a viable first line approach compared to mTESE in regards to success rates of finding spermatozoa, complication rates and pregnancy outcomes.
A total of 110 men will be randomized to either mTESE or TESA and the rates of finding spermatozoa will be compared. However, for ethical reasons, because some believe mTESE have a greater chance of finding sperm cells, all men with a failed TESA will have a mTESE afterwards.
Detailed description
Background Infertility is a significant social- and health problem in the Western World and at the moment in Denmark one in ten babies are born with the help of assisted reproduction. In 50% of infertile couples a male factor can be identified as a contributing cause (1).
Azoospermia is defined as the absence of spermatozoa in the ejaculate and it is a condition affecting 10-15% of infertile men (2, 3). Azoospermia is divided into obstructive azoospermia (OA) and nonobstructive azoospermia (NOA) of which the latter constitutes 60% (2, 3). In NOA the production of spermatozoa in the testis is either absent or markedly decreased.
Since 1999 microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) has become the preferred treatment option for NOA in many centers worldwide (4). The procedure is performed in general anesthesia using an operating microscope to carefully examine the entire testicular tissue for the presence of spermatozoa which can be used for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). The advantages of mTESE include high sperm retrieval rates (SRR), in recent systematic reviews reported around 52% (5-8), and low reported complication rates (9-11). However mTESE is a time-consuming invasive procedure requiring the right expertise, the right equipment and a proper setup of the fertility clinic.
An alternative to mTESE is a percutaneous testicular sperm aspiration (TESA). This procedure is simple to perform using a biopsy needle to aspirate testicular tissue. The aspirated tissue is examined for the presence of spermatozoa and SRR for this procedure is usually reported around 25% (5-8). The lower SRR compared to mTESE is the main limitation of this method, but the procedure is well tolerated by patients and due to its simplicity and short duration it can easily be performed in the out-patient clinic. In collaboration with University of Michigan the TESA technique has been improved by using an 18 gauge needle and performing multiple (50-100) passes throughout the entire testicular tissue while applying a vacuum. In the remainder of this document this multiple needle-pass TESA will be referred to as "TESA". Recently the investigators retrospectively evaluated this approach and found a SRR of 30% using TESA and interestingly the SRR of mTESE following a failed TESA was only 11% (12).
However, there is no robust evidence on the optimal sperm retrieval protocol on men with NOA. This is in part due to the fact that no randomized trials have been performed to compare the two procedures. Often patients from different countries are required to pay the infertility treatment themselves and the cost for a TESA is around $500 while a mTESE is around $8.000. This makes it difficult to perform a randomized trial in most countries but because of the public health systems of Denmark and Sweden there is a unique possibility to be the first in the world to do a randomized trial on this matter.
Hypothesis In men with NOA, the investigators hypothesize that TESA is a viable first line approach compared to mTESE in regards to SRR, complication rates and pregnancy outcomes.
Screening and randomization Potential study patients and their partners will initially be identified in their work-up during their infertility treatment. When a patient is identified as having NOA, the patient will be screened according to inclusion- and exclusion criteria. If these are met and the patient provides an informed consent for participation, the patient is included and randomized to undergo mTESE or TESA. Patients will be recruited from the fertility clinics at Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Malmö University Hospital, Holbaek Hospital and Rigshospitalet in collaboration with Department of Growth and Reproduction, Rigshospitalet.
Planning the treatment and surgery Treatment of the infertile couples will follow regular treatment protocols at the respective fertility clinics. This includes freezing retrieved sperm cells and thawing them in relation to the oocyte retrieval. As an alternative to sperm cell freezing, retrieved oocytes will be frozen and thawed in relation to the surgical sperm retrieval. The aim is to have 6-8 oocytes stored before operation for couples following this route. All patients will undergo full anesthesia. If the patient is randomized to TESA and this fails, then a salvage mTESE can be done immediately while in the operating theatre.
Visits Before visit 1 all patients and their partners will have received written and oral information on the study and will have had time to provide an informed consent.
At visit 1 patients and possibly their partners (mandatory in cases of oocyte cryopreservation) meet with the primary investigator. It will be secured that an informed consent for participation is signed. The focus of visit 1 will be on accessing the men's evaluation leading to the NOA diagnosis and checking inclusion- and exclusion criteria. In addition, information regarding medical history will be obtained and a physical examination of the external genitalia will be carried out. Patients will fill out questionnaires on psychosexual health and pain before the visit and their answers will be reviewed together. A blood sample will be taken for the purpose of measuring hormone levels and for storage in the biobank. Likewise patients will bring a semen sample for storage in the biobank. If not previously done patients will be tested with regards to karyotype, AzF microdeletions and CFTR mutations if deemed necessary.
Visit 2 will be the actual procedure. Follow-up is comprised by patients filling out the mentioned questionnaires, reporting any complications and having a blood sample drawn at visit 3 and 4. Follow-up will primarily be done by phone/mail, but at visit 3 and 4 patients will have to go to the Department of Growth and Reproduction, Rigshospitalet (for Danish patients) or the fertility clinic at Malmö University Hospital (for Swedish patients) to have blood samples drawn. Samples collected in Sweden will be send for analysis at the Department of Growth and Reproduction, Rigshospitalet. Pregnancy outcome will be reported by phone/mail 9-15 months after the procedure is done.
Biobank A research biobank will be made containing blood samples, semen and testicular tissue. Blood samples will be used for genotyping and to measure relevant biomarkers including piRNAs, miRNAs, protein markers and biochemical markers. Semen will also be used to measure relevant biomarkers. Testicular tissue will be used for testing for molecular and biochemical markers of spermatogenesis and to measure intratesticular testosterone levels. Additionally testicular tissue showing maturation arrest will be used for attempts to maturate germ cells in vitro (not to be used for fertilization, only research). The purpose of the above is to find markers of successful sperm retrieval and to get a better understanding of the biology of NOA and potentially to develop pharmacological strategies in the future for treating certain forms of NOA as e.g. maturations arrest.
Safety and adverse events:
Hematoma As TESA/ mTESE is a surgery there is a risk of post-operative bleeding leading to scrotal or spermatic cord hematomas. Estimated risk <1,5%.
Infection As TESA/ mTESE is a surgery there is a risk of infection. Estimated risk <1% Pain Pain is expected to occur after both procedures but especially after mTESE Drop in testosterone level In the litterature this is reported as a transient event following mTESE however there is a risk of more lasting androgen deficiency. Careful surgical techniques will be used to limit the amount of tissue damage.
Possible disadvantages:
Lower SRR following TESA SRR are reported lower for TESA compared to mTESE. For this reason patients with an unsuccessful TESA will be offered a salvage mTESE Oocyte cryopreservation In the past fertilization outcomes after cryopreservation have been lower compared to fresh oocytes. However with the evolution of cryopreservation techniques (vitrification) IVF pregnancy rates with the use of cryopreserved oocytes are now similar to those of fresh oocytes. (15) Grading of complications Complications will be graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications (14).
Ethical evaluation This study will follow the newest edition of the Helsinki Declaration and at all times follow applicable laws. It will be reported to "Datatilsynet", "Videnskabsetisk komite" and the "Ethical Committee of Lund University".
Some of the ethical aspects related to this project have been briefly described in the safety and adverse events section. Both mTESE and TESA are safe procedures and although the investigators previously found a higher complication rate with mTESE compared to TESA (12), the general literature describe both procedures with comparable risks related to infection and hematomas.
To make the study possible to complete, either the sperm cells or the oocytes retrieved from the women will have to undergo cryopreservation. Sperm cell cryopreservation is standard practice at the fertility clinics today. Previously only fresh oocytes were used for in-vitro fertilization but recently it has been shown that treatment using cryopreserved oocytes give similar pregnancy rates to those of fresh oocytes. Thus freezing the oocytes should not be a disadvantage to the couples.
When looking at sperm retrieval rates, mTESE has until now been superior to TESA. However with the improved TESA results are expected to be more equal. In addition patients randomized to TESA will have the benefit of a more simple and less invasive treatment compared to mTESE. Moreover patients randomized to TESA will be provided with an option to receive a salvage mTESE that can be carried out the same day because all patients will undergo full anesthesia. In this way all patients included in the study will receive equal treatment options for NOA.
Attempts of maturation of germ cells in vitro will be made using tissue with partial or total maturation arrest. If successful, the germ cells maturated in vitro will not be used for any attempt of fertilization but only as "proof of concept" regarding treatment of azoospermia due to maturation arrest.
In a broader picture this project will be the first randomized study on this matter and therefore it will bring a clearer picture on which is the optimal sperm retrieval technique for men with NOA. This will benefit many patients with NOA in the future.
Publication of results:
Results from the study will be published in international peer-reviewed scientific journals, national journals and hospital websites. This will happen no matter the outcome of the study meaning that both positive, negative and inconclusive results will be made public. Additionally results will be presented at conferences and meetings. All published results will be made anonymous.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Trial type: Clinical randomized multi-center controlled trial Randomization: Block randomization is performed with the use of a computer generated block randomization list Participants: Patients with NOA undergoing fertility treatment
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| mTESE | Active comparator | Procedure: mTESEPatients randomized to mTESE |
| TESA | Active comparator | Procedure: TESAPatients randomized to TESA |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 70 years
- Sex
- Male only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Azoospermia verified in at least two semen samples within the past six months, including assessment of the centrifuged pellet as per the WHO 5th edition (13)
- Testis volume (Prader's orchidometer) ≤ 15ml on both sides
- No indication of obstructive causes of azoospermia in medical history or physical examination (ex. absent vas deferens, vasectomy, scrotal trauma/injury, hernia repair or other operations potentially damaging the vas deferens)
- Capable and legally competent individual
Key exclusion criteria (13 listed)
- Previous attempts of surgical sperm retrieval
- Previous testicular biopsy
- Anejaculation
- Retrograde ejaculation
- Bleeding disorders rendering surgery too high a risk
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| mTESEAlso: Microdissection testicular sperm extractionmTESE is performed according to the initial description by Schlegel (4). General anesthesia is used. Midline incision of the scrotum is made and carried down to the level of the tunica vaginalis, which is opened to deliver the testis. Equatorial incision is made and the testis bivalved. The operating microscope is used to identify plump-appearing seminiferous tubules, and biopsies are taken from these areas. These samples are examined by an embryologist in the operating room after initial gross dispersion by passing the tissue through a 24G angiocatheter. The procedure is stopped if spermatozoa are found. If no plump tubules are found, random biopsies targeting every area of the testis are taken. If necessary the procedure is carried out on the contralateral testis. Hemostasis is obtained with careful bipolar cautery, and the tunica albuginea and the tunica vaginalis are closed with a running 4-0 Vicryl. Standard scrotal closure is performed and gentle pressure dressing is applied. | Procedure or surgery | mTESE |
| TESAAlso: Percutaneous testicular sperm aspirationIn general anesthesia an 18 gauge needle is introduced into each testis, and negative pressure applied with a 10 ml syringe. Multiple passes throughout the entire testis, numbering 50-100 passes, are made through a single percutaneous/tunical entry and continued until tissue is visible in the hub of the needle. This is removed by brisk extraction of the needle and pressure held to tamponade bleeding. The aspirated tissue is examined by an embryologist in the operating room after initial gross dispersion by passing the tissue through a 24 gauge angiocatheter. | Procedure or surgery | TESA |
Primary outcome
Sperm retrieval rate
Time frame: Assessed immediately after the procedure
Rate of succesful sperm retrievals defined as at least one spermatozoa found suitable for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)
25 secondary outcomes
Conversion rate to mTESE
Time frame: Recorded immediately after the procedure
Sperm retrieval rate after salvage mTESE
Time frame: Recorded immediately after the procedure
Complication rates
Time frame: Recorded in the first 6 months after surgery
Pregnancy outcomes
Time frame: Recorded in the first 9-15 months after surgery
Difference in perceived stress scale (PSS) score
Time frame: Three months before to three months after surgery
Difference in PainDetect pain scale score
Time frame: Three months before to three months after surgery
Difference in pain score - Visual Analog Scale
Time frame: Three months before to three months after surgery
Difference in erectile function score
Time frame: Three months before to three months after surgery
Difference in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores - subscale anxiety.
Time frame: Three months before to three months after surgery
Difference in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores - subscale depression.
Time frame: Three months before to three months after surgery
Difference in Short-Form 12-item Survery (SF-12) mental health summary score
Time frame: Three months before to three months after surgery
Difference in Short-Form 12-item Survery (SF-12) physical health summary score
Time frame: Three months before to three months after surgery
Age as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Time frame: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Body Mass Index (BMI) as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Time frame: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Testis histology as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Time frame: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Testis size as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Time frame: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Biomarkers as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Time frame: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Intra-testicular testosterone level as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Time frame: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
FSH as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Time frame: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
LH as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Time frame: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Testosterone as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Time frame: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Inhibin B as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Time frame: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
AMH as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Time frame: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Estradiol as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Time frame: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Prolactin as a predictor of successful sperm retrieval
Time frame: Calculated 1-3 years after surgical intervention
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 10 Sep 2021.
- Background: PubMed 12009338Sharlip ID, Jarow JP, Belker AM, Lipshultz LI, Sigman M, Thomas AJ, Schlegel PN, Howards SS, Nehra A, Damewood MD, Overstreet JW, Sadovsky R. Best practice policies for male infertility. Fertil Steril. 2002 May;77(5):873-82. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(02)03105-9. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 2499695Jarow JP, Espeland MA, Lipshultz LI. Evaluation of the azoospermic patient. J Urol. 1989 Jul;142(1):62-5. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)38662-7.
- Background: PubMed 7095683Willott GM. Frequency of azoospermia. Forensic Sci Int. 1982 Jul-Aug;20(1):9-10. doi: 10.1016/0379-0738(82)90099-8. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 10374109Schlegel PN. Testicular sperm extraction: microdissection improves sperm yield with minimal tissue excision. Hum Reprod. 1999 Jan;14(1):131-5. doi: 10.1093/humrep/14.1.131.
- Background: PubMed 23241638Dabaja AA, Schlegel PN. Microdissection testicular sperm extraction: an update. Asian J Androl. 2013 Jan;15(1):35-9. doi: 10.1038/aja.2012.141. Epub 2012 Dec 17.
- Background: PubMed 24193894Deruyver Y, Vanderschueren D, Van der Aa F. Outcome of microdissection TESE compared with conventional TESE in non-obstructive azoospermia: a systematic review. Andrology. 2014 Jan;2(1):20-4. doi: 10.1111/j.2047-2927.2013.00148.x. Epub 2013 Nov 6.
- Background: PubMed 17895238Donoso P, Tournaye H, Devroey P. Which is the best sperm retrieval technique for non-obstructive azoospermia? A systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2007 Nov-Dec;13(6):539-49. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmm029. Epub 2007 Sep 24.
- Background: PubMed 26263080Bernie AM, Mata DA, Ramasamy R, Schlegel PN. Comparison of microdissection testicular sperm extraction, conventional testicular sperm extraction, and testicular sperm aspiration for nonobstructive azoospermia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2015 Nov;104(5):1099-103.e1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.07.1136. Epub 2015 Aug 8.
- Background: PubMed 10686214Amer M, Ateyah A, Hany R, Zohdy W. Prospective comparative study between microsurgical and conventional testicular sperm extraction in non-obstructive azoospermia: follow-up by serial ultrasound examinations. Hum Reprod. 2000 Mar;15(3):653-6. doi: 10.1093/humrep/15.3.653.
- Background: PubMed 12187223Okada H, Dobashi M, Yamazaki T, Hara I, Fujisawa M, Arakawa S, Kamidono S. Conventional versus microdissection testicular sperm extraction for nonobstructive azoospermia. J Urol. 2002 Sep;168(3):1063-7. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64575-2.
- Background: PubMed 15922422Ramasamy R, Yagan N, Schlegel PN. Structural and functional changes to the testis after conventional versus microdissection testicular sperm extraction. Urology. 2005 Jun;65(6):1190-4. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2004.12.059.
- Background: PubMed 26789006Jensen CF, Ohl DA, Hiner MR, Fode M, Shah T, Smith GD, Sonksen J. Multiple needle-pass percutaneous testicular sperm aspiration as first-line treatment in azoospermic men. Andrology. 2016 Mar;4(2):257-62. doi: 10.1111/andr.12143. Epub 2016 Jan 20.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Non-obstructive Azoospermia
Active, not recruitingPhase 1/2
A Novel Aromatase Inhibitor, Leflutrozole, for Treatment of Non-Obstructive Azoospermia
Infertility Due to Azoospermia, Infertility, Male
RecruitingPhase 1/2
Intra-Testicular Transplantation of Autologous Stem Cells for Treatment of Non-Obstructive Azoospermia Male Infertility.
Non-obstructive Azoospermia
Recruiting
IntelliWell: An AI-Assisted Imaging Platform for Detection and Location of Ultra-Rare Testicular Sperm in Surgical Specimens
Infertility, Azoospermia
Not yet recruiting
Gonadotropin Therapy in Idiopathic Hypogonadal Non-Obstructive
APHRODITE Group
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy (PGT-A) in Couples With Non-obstructive Azoospermia (NOA)
Non-obstructive Azoospermia, Male Infertility
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
4 sites in 2 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing mTESE and TESA in people with Non-obstructive Azoospermia, run by Herlev and Gentofte Hospital at 4 sites in 2 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 13 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 10 Sep 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 4 sites in Denmark, Sweden. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Sperm retrieval rate (time frame: Assessed immediately after the procedure). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03550716, which also lists 15 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 10 Sep 2021.