IMPORTANCE Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) is increasingly used in patients without severe male factor infertility without clear evidence of a benefit over conventional in vitro fertilization (IVF). OBJECTIVE To assess national trends and reproductive outcomes for fresh IVF cycles (embryos transferred without being frozen) following the use of ICSI compared with conventional IVF with respect to clinical indications for ICSI use. DESIGN, SETTING, AND POPULATION Retrospective cohort study using data on fresh IVF and ICSI cycles reported to the US National Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance System during 1996-2012. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Trends in ICSI use during 1996-2012 with respect to male factor infertility, unexplained infertility, maternal age 38 years or older, low oocyte yield, and 2 or more prior assisted reproductive technology cycles; reproductive outcomes for conventional IVF and ICSI cycles during 2008-2012, stratified by the presence or absence of male factor infertility. RESULTS Of the 1 395 634 fresh IVF cycles from 1996 through 2012, 908 767 (65.1%) used ICSI and 499 135 (35.8%) reported male factor infertility. Among cycles with male factor infertility, ICSI use increased from 76.3% (10 876/14 259) to 93.3% (32 191/34 506) (P < .001) during 1996-2012; for those without male factor infertility, ICSI use increased from 15.4% (4197/27 191) to 66.9% (42 321/63 250) (P < .001). During 2008-2012, male factor infertility was reported for 35.7% (176 911/494 907) of fresh cycles. Among those cycles, ICSI use was associated with a lower multiple birth rate compared with conventional IVF (30.9% vs 34.2%; adjusted relative risk [RR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.83-0.91). Among cycles without male factor infertility (n = 317 996), ICSI use was associated with lower rates of implantation (23.0% vs 25.2%; adjusted RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.91-0.95), live birth (36.5% vs 39.2%; adjusted RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.93-0.97), and multiple live birth (30.1% vs 31.0%; adjusted RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.91-0.95) vs conventional IVF. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among fresh IVF cycles in the United States, ICSI use increased from 36.4% in 1996 to 76.2% in 2012, with the largest relative increase among cycles without male factor infertility. Compared with conventional IVF, ICSI use was not associated with improved postfertilization reproductive outcomes, irrespective of male factor infertility diagnosis.

IMPORTANCE-Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) is increasingly used in patients without severe male factor infertility without clear evidence of a benefit over conventional in vitro fertilization (IVF). OBJECTIVE-To assess national trends and reproductive outcomes for fresh IVF cycles (embryos transferred without being frozen) following the use of ICSI compared with conventional IVF with respect to clinical indications for ICSI use.

Varicocelectomy is the most commonly performed surgical procedure for the treatment of male infertility. Although several different techniques for varicocele repair have been described in the literature, microsurgical varicocelectomy performed through a subinguinal or inguinal incision is recognized as the gold-standard approach for varicocelectomy, due to high success rates with minimal complications. Standard indications for varicocelectomy include palpable varicocele(s), with one or more abnormal semen parameters, and, for the couple trying to conceive, in the setting of normal or correctable female infertility. However, varicocele repair is often recommended and undertaken for reasons other than infertility, including low serum testosterone, testicular pain, testicular hypotrophy and poor sperm DNA quality. This article reviews the technical aspects of microsurgical varicocelectomy, and its indications in adults and adolescents.

No abstract

The primary challenge to identifying and addressing barriers in access to care for male factor infertility is accurate measurement of the prevalence of male infertility. Current estimates are based on couples pursuing assisted reproduction, and likely underestimate the problem. These estimates also fail to account for the number of patients facing infertility due to cancer or cancer treatment. Lack of health insurance coverage for the diagnosis and treatment of infertility presents a major barrier for couples struggling with infertility. However, it is not the only barrier. Education level, household income, cultural norms, religious beliefs, geographic location, and the availability of specialty-trained reproductive urologists are all important factors in determining the ease with which patients access and obtain infertility care. Addressing each of these obstacles directly is imperative to improving reproductive care and outcomes for infertile couples in the United States.

Introduction Men treated for prostate cancer suffer from treatment-related sexual side effects that adversely affect their relationships and quality of life. Aim To investigate what prostate cancer survivors and their partners want from a sexual recovery intervention, and whether they consider an online tool acceptable for use in promoting sexual recovery. Methods This mixed-methods study included focus groups and interviews with both heterosexual and gay cancer survivors, as well as their partners. Focus groups and interviews probed experiences with treatment, side effects, and support received/needed for sexual recovery. Participants responded to proposed web-based intervention content. Interviews were analyzed with thematic content analysis. Their sexual function was assessed with validated measures. Main Outcome Measures Acceptability of online tools for promoting sexual recovery was evaluated. Results Participants included 14 patients and 10 partners (2 male). Patient and partner median age was 62 and 62.5 years, respectively. Treatment ranged from surgery alone to combined radiation and hormonal therapy. Qualitative data analysis yielded 5 main intervention needs: (i) pretreatment discussion of sexual side effects, rehabilitation, emotional impact and realistic expectations, (ii) improved sexual communication within couples, (iii) strategies for promoting sexual intimacy beyond penetrative intercourse, (iv) attentiveness to partners' needs, and (v) access to peer support. Gay men specifically expressed the need for improved provider understanding of their sexuality and experiences. Most considered a web-based approach to be acceptable. Conclusion Patients and partners value both pretreatment preparation for sexual recovery and support for sexual recovery for both after treatment. A web-based approach may help mitigate barriers to access to these support services. Mehta A, Pollack CE, Gillespie T., et. al. What Patients and Partners Want in Interventions That Support Sexual Recovery After Prostate Cancer Treatment: An Exploratory Convergent Mixed Methods Study. Sex Med 2019;7:184–191.

No abstract

PurposeEstradiol (E2) modulates testicular functions including steroidogenesis, but the mechanisms of E2 signaling in human testis are poorly understood. GPER-1 (GPR30), a G protein-coupled membrane receptor, mediates rapid genomic and non-genomic response to estrogens. The aim of this study was to evaluate GPER-1 expression in the testis, and its role in estradiol dependent regulation of steroidogenesis in isolated rat Leydig cells and human testis.Materials and MethodsIsolated Leydig cells (LC) from adult rats and human testicular tissue were used in this study. Expression and localization studies of GPER-1 were performed with qRT-PCR, immunofluorescence, immunohistochemistry and Western Blot. Luteinizing Hormone (LH) -stimulated, isolated LC were incubated with estradiol, G-1 (GPER-1-selective agonist), and estrogen receptor antagonist ICI 182,780. Testosterone production was measured with radioimmunoassay. LC viability after incubation with G-1 was measured using 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-5-(3-carboxymethoxyphenyl)-2-(4-sulfophenyl)-2H-tetrazolium, inner salt (MTS) assay.ResultsGPER-1 mRNA is abundantly expressed in rat LC and human testis. Co-localization experiments showed high expression levels of GPER-1 protein in LC. E2-dependent activation of GPER-1 lowers testosterone production in isolated rats LCs and in human testis, with statistically and clinically significant drops in testosterone production by 20–30% as compared to estradiol-naïve LC. The exposure to G-1 does not affect viability of isolated LCs.ConclusionsOur results indicate that activation of GPER-1 lowers testosterone levels in the rat and human testis. The expression of GPER-1 in human testis, which lack ERα, makes it an exciting target for developing new agents affecting testosterone production in men.