On the Etiology of Epididymitis

Wolin, Leonard H.

doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(17)61567-2

Cited by 38 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Before tests for detecting Chlamydia trachomatis were available, the cause of most cases of acute epididymitis was unknown, and the condition was regarded as an enigma [4]; urethrovasal reflux was regarded as a likely aetiological factor [10]. Subsequent studies showed that epididymitis is mostly an infective condition (Table 1[11–19]).…”

Section: Microbiologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The relationship between acute epididymitis and subfertility in men is poorly understood. Involvement of the testis by inflammation causes decreased spermatogenesis during acute epididymitis [10], and subsequent reduced spermatogenesis is a frequent consequence [85]. However, the incidence of long‐term subfertility after unilateral testicular involvement is unclear [86].…”

Section: Outcomes and Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Acute epididymitis

Luzzi¹,

O'Brien²

2001

BJU International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Microbiologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Outcomes and Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acute epididymitis

Luzzi¹,

O'Brien²

2001

BJU International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Comparable observations have been made in a limited number of males (ethical limitations) suffering from acute epididymitis. In the acute phase, a reduction in spermatogenesis and an intratesticular invasion by polymorphonuclear cells were evident in such patients (Osegbe, ; Wolin, ), while in the follow‐up about 1 year later, disruption of testicular architecture associated with fibrosis, hyalinisation, hypospermatogenesis, maturation arrest or Sertoli cell‐only syndrome was reported (Dietz, ; Osegbe, ). This shows that genital tract infection is clearly related to impaired testicular architecture and also a possible disruption of the blood–testis barrier (Fijak et al, ; Lotti et al, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High prevalence of urogenital infection/inflammation in patients with azoospermia does not impede surgical sperm retrieval

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Considering infection/inflammation to be an important risk factor in male infertility, the aim of this study was to make a comprehensive evaluation of the prevalence of urogenital tract infection/inflammation and its potential impact on sperm retrieval in azoospermic patients. In this prospective study, 71 patients with azoospermia were subjected to an extensive andrological workup including comprehensive microbiological diagnostics (2-glass test, semen, testicular swab and testicular tissue analysis) and testicular biopsy/testicular sperm extraction (TESE). Medical history suggested urogenital tract infection/inflammation in 7% of patients, 11% harboured STIs, 14% showed significant bacteriospermia, 15% had seminal inflammation, 17% fulfilled the MAGI definition, and 27% had relevant pathogens. At the testicular level, 1 patient had a swab positive for bacteria, no viruses were detected, tissue specimens never indicated pathogens, whereas histopathology revealed focal immune cell infiltrates in 23% of samples. Testicular sperm retrieval rate was 100% in obstructive and 46% in nonobstructive azoospermia. None of the infection/inflammation-related variables was associated with the success of sperm retrieval or inflammatory lesions in the testis. The high prevalence of urogenital infection/inflammation among azoospermic men underpins their role as significant aetiologic factors in male infertility.However, this observation does not refer to the chances of sperm retrieval at the time of surgery/TESE. K E Y W O R D Sazoospermia, genital tract inflammation, infertility, male accessory gland infection, TESE 2 of 10 | PILATZ eT AL.

show abstract

“…Acute epididymo-orchitis is a common clinical problem in urological practice, sometimes accounting for up to 24.5% of all urological admissions (Wolin, 1971). In 55 to 100% of cases there is no clear aetiology (Harnisch et al, 1977).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%