In a population of non-obstructive azoospermia patients, the efficacy of microsurgical testicular sperm extraction (microTESE) and conventional TESE was evaluated in a randomized controlled study on 138 testicles, classified and paired in a 48-square table according to the different classes of the following three variables: patient plasma FSH concentration, orchidometry and testicular histology. Sperm retrieval was positive in 21/22 testicles with hypospermatogenesis (11/11, 10/11; microTESE, TESE respectively), in 12/14 with maturation arrest (6/7, 6/7), in 16/22 with incomplete Sertoli cell-only syndrome (8/11, 8/11), and in 16/80 with complete Sertoli cell-only syndrome (11/40, 5/40). Sperm recovery was positive in 5/24 patients with FSH concentration > or = 3 x maximum value of normal range (N) (4/12, 1/12), in 17/40 patients with 2N < or = FSH < 3N (9/20, 8/20), in 30/48 patients with N < FSH < 2N (17/24, 13/24), and in 13/26 patients with FSH = N (6/13, 7/13). Regarding orchidometry, sperm recovery was positive in 11/18 testicles with volume (V) > or = 12 ml (6/9, 5/9), in 27/56 testicles with 8 ml < or = V < 12 ml (15/28, 12/28), and in 27/64 testicles with V < 8 ml (15/32, 12/32). FSH value and the surgical procedure were the two variables significantly (P < 0.05) predicting positive sperm retrieval.

vein in the spermatic cord fat was cannulated. A 7-9 cm segment of the spermatic cord was clamped for 8-10 min; at the start of the ischaemia time, 1.5-3 mL of 3% atoxysclerol was injected into the cannulated vein. After sclerotherapy, the vein was ligated at the injection site, and the blood flow to the cord was restored. RESULTSThe mean operative duration was 25 min. Follow-up at 3 and 6 months after surgery, with objective examination and scrotal ultrasonography, revealed one case of clinical recurrence/persistence. The most common complication was penile lymphangitis (nine men) that regressed spontaneously; three men had temporary orchialgia. There were no cases of secondary hydrocele or testicular atrophy. CONCLUSIONSThe modified technique appears to be relatively easy and safe, and to of low cost. Given the promising results in terms of complications and persistence, the treatment appears to be a suitable first-line approach for the surgical treatment of varicocele.

Varicocele is a common problem among infertile men. Varicocele repair (VR) is frequently performed to improve semen parameters and the chances of pregnancy. However, there is a lack of consensus about the diagnosis, indications for VR and its outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore global practice patterns on the management of varicocele in the context of male infertility. Materials and Methods: Materials and Methods: Sixty practicing urologists/andrologists from 23 countries contributed 382 multiple-choice-questions pertaining to varicocele management. These were condensed into an online questionnaire that was forwarded to clinicians involved in male infertility management through direct invitation. The results were analyzed for disagreement and agreement in practice patterns and, compared with the latest guidelines of international professional societies (American Urological Association [AUA], American Society for Reproductive Medicine [ASRM], and European Association of Urology [EAU]), and with evidence emerging from recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Additionally, an expert opinion on each topic was provided based on the consensus of 16 experts in the field. Results: Results: The questionnaire was answered by 574 clinicians from 59 countries. The majority of respondents were urologists/ uro-andrologists. A wide diversity of opinion was seen in every aspect of varicocele diagnosis, indications for repair, choice of technique, management of sub-clinical varicocele and the role of VR in azoospermia. A significant proportion of the responses were at odds with the recommendations of AUA, ASRM, and EAU. A large number of clinical situations were identified where no guidelines are available. Conclusions: Conclusions: This study is the largest global survey performed to date on the clinical management of varicocele for male infertility. It demonstrates: 1) a wide disagreement in the approach to varicocele management, 2) large gaps in the clinical practice guidelines from professional societies, and 3) the need for further studies on several aspects of varicocele management in infertile men.

testicle was isolated after sectioning the gubernaculum testis. In a separate operative field, an equatorial incision of the albuginea was made in a plane orthogonal to the major axis of the testicle, sparing the subtunical vasa. The parenchymal lobuli were dislodged and the seminiferous tubules dissociated, the nodule identified and completely removed, together with ª 1 mm of surrounding healthy tissue. This technique can also be used for microsurgical testicular sperm extraction (MicroTESE), to retrieve sperm in infertile men. RESULTSIn two infertile men MicroTESE was also performed. Histology revealed one case each of seminoma, Leydig-cell tumour, Leydig cell hyperplasia, atrophy, normality in the incidental forms, and complicated cysts of the albuginea. In the follow-up for infertility reasons, no scarring was observable on the tunica albuginea in the men who had conservative therapy. One year later the patient with seminoma was free of disease. CONCLUSIONSThe increasingly frequent detection of benign testicular lesions, particularly in infertile men, calls for a surgical approach that must be as conservative as possible for the testicular parenchyma. We think that microsurgery should be the first-line technique in small suspected testicular lesions in infertile men. KEYWORDSinfertility, testicular neoplasm, conservative surgery, Leydig cell tumour OBJECTIVETo describe a microsurgical technique for removing suspected testicular masses with sparing of the testicular parenchyma, and to describe case studies. PATIENTS AND METHODSSix men were referred with testicular lesions (3-6 mm) detected on ultrasonography (US); in one, the lesion was palpable. US showed hypoechoic lesions and in two cases were mixed hypoechoic and anechoic. In these men, the testicular lesion was identified by US before surgery, giving three-dimensional coordinates to facilitate intraoperative recognition. A traditional inguinal incision was used and the funiculus clamped subinguinally without opening the canal. The

Background: Patients with non-obstructive azoospermia with a previously failed conventional testicular sperm extraction may undergo a salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction with the probability of successful sperm retrieval being almost dependent upon the number of previous surgical attempts and to different histopathologic categories. Objectives: To determine whether the seminiferous tubules pattern and the histological categories could affect the sperm retrieval rate in patients with non-obstructive azoospermia undergoing salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction after failed conventional testicular sperm extraction. Materials and methods: Seventy-nine patients undergoing unilateral or bilateral salvage microdissection testicular sperm extraction were evaluated. During microdissection testicular sperm extraction, if present, dilated tubules were retrieved, otherwise,tubules with slightly larger caliber than that of the surroundings were removed. When no dilated tubule or tubule with slightly larger caliber was found, not dilated tubules were excised. A prediction model was built with seminiferous tubules pattern and testis histology as covariates.Results: Sperm retrieval was successful in 30 out of 79 patients. The prediction model correctly classified 88.3% of cases, explained the 29.7% variability of the outcome, and significantly predicted the microdissection testicular sperm extraction outcome with a sensitivity of 67.7% and a specificity of 90.2%, Both tubules with slightly larger caliber and not dilated tubules were negatively associated with the chance of retrieving spermatozoa. Among the histological categories, only early maturation arrest was significant to the model (log(SSR) = 0.57 -1.9SDT -3.3NDT -1.76EMA) (where SSR is sperm retrieval rate, SDT is tubule with slightly larger caliber, NDT is not dilated tubule, and EMA is early maturation arrest). The model had a clearly useful discrimination (area under the curve = 0.814), the estimated performance was 0.8105, and internal calibration was acceptable (p > 0.05).