Hum. Reprod. Advance Access published online on August 3, 2006
Human Reproduction, doi:10.1093/humrep/del279
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Prince Henry’s Institute; Andrology Australia, Monash University, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton, Australia; University Department of Growth and Reproduction, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Testicular biopsy is a crucial assessment in reproductive practice with diagnostic and prognostic importance for assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) and risk of testicular neoplasia. Endocrine and genetic tests cannot reliably distinguish obstructive azoospermia (OA) from non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) or predict recovery of mature spermatids by testicular sperm extraction (TESE). Currently, divergent histological reporting systems and the use of imprecise terminology seriously degrade the value of the literature on TESE recovery rates and hamper evaluation of treatments and research on genotype-phenotype relationships. The rising incidence of testis cancer and carcinoma in situ (CIS), especially in infertile populations, requires that every effort be made for its early detection. We provide a systematic approach to the histological classification of spermatogenic disorders and detection of CIS in adult patients. We evaluate a large consecutive series of bilateral biopsies from infertile men and report (i) the frequency of bilateral or discordant patterns that supports the use of bilateral biopsy for comprehensive evaluation and (ii) a high prevalence of mixed patterns, particularly within the hypospermatogenesis classification, that helps account for reported success of TESE. We propose a new diagnosis code for testicular biopsies that addresses the needs of ART clinicians and allows data storage and retrieval of value in clinical practice and research.
Received May 8, 2006
Revised June 11, 2006
Accepted June 16, 2006
Article
Histological evaluation of the human testis--approaches to optimizing the clinical value of the assessment: Mini Review
R.I. McLachlan 1 *, E. Rajpert-De Meyts 2, C.E. Hoei-Hansen 2, D.M. de Kretser 3, and N.E. Skakkebaek 2
2 University Department of Growth and Reproduction, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
3 Andrology Australia, Monash University, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton, Australia; Monash Institute of Medical Research, Monash University, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton, Australia
R.I. McLachlan, E-mail: rob.mclachlan{at}princehenrys.org
![]()
Abstract ![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
C. L. Borg, K. M. Wolski, G. M. Gibbs, and M. K. O'Bryan Phenotyping male infertility in the mouse: how to get the most out of a 'non-performer' Hum. Reprod. Update, September 15, 2009; (2009) dmp032v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. P. Amann The Cycle of the Seminiferous Epithelium in Humans: A Need to Revisit? J Androl, September 1, 2008; 29(5): 469 - 487. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Donoso, H. Tournaye, and P. Devroey Which is the best sperm retrieval technique for non-obstructive azoospermia? A systematic review Hum. Reprod. Update, November 1, 2007; 13(6): 539 - 549. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A.-N. Spiess, C. Feig, W. Schulze, F. Chalmel, H. Cappallo-Obermann, M. Primig, and C. Kirchhoff Cross-platform gene expression signature of human spermatogenic failure reveals inflammatory-like response Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2007; 22(11): 2936 - 2946. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||


