(074) OFFICE-BASED MICRODISSECTION TESTICULAR SPERM EXTRACTION FOR NONOBSTRUCTIVE AZOOSPERMIA RESULTS IN HIGH SPERM RETRIEVAL RATES

Abstract Introduction Microdissection testicular sperm extraction (microTESE) is performed in men with nonobstructive azoospermia who desire sperm retrieval for use in IVF. This procedure can be performed in the operating room or in the clinic with local analgesic. Objective To report office-based microTESE sperm retrieval, fertilization, and livebirth rates. Methods A review was conducted of all patients who underwent office-based microTESE for nonobstructive azoospermia with a partner that who underwent concurrent oocyte retrieval for an intended in-vitro fertilization (IVF) intracytoplasmic injection (ICSI) cycle 2022-2024. All male partners underwent Y chromosome microdeletion testing, karyotype analysis, and hormonal testing preoperatively. Patients with a diagnosis of hypogonadism were offered medical therapy and those diagnosed with a varicocele were offered varicocelectomy prior to microTESE. Office-based microTESE was performed using a surgical operating microscope, spermatic cord block, and oral anxiolytic. Female partners underwent oocyte retrieval with oocyte cryopreservation prior to microTESE. Oocyte warming and ICSI was performed only following the collection of motile sperm from the fresh microTESE samples. Relevant demographic and clinical data were collected for patients and their partners. Descriptive data analysis was performed and reported as mean ± standard deviation. Results Ten patients underwent 11 office-based microTESE procedures. One patient had repeat microTESE following an unsuccessful IVF/ICSI cycle. Overall sperm retrieval rate was 70% for first time microTESE with mean search time 197.2 ± 96.5 min. Amongst couples with successful sperm retrieval, normal fertilization rate was 42%. Early cleavage arrest was seen in 84% of normally fertilized oocytes with a 16% blastocyst rate. Embryo development arrested entirely in two couples, while the remaining five couples had at least one blastocyst on day 5 and underwent embryo transfer. Of these, four resulted in a clinical pregnancy (36%). Three couples had a successful live birth and one has an ongoing pregnancy with ultrasound-confirmed fetal heartbeat. Conclusions Our small series demonstrates high sperm retrieval rates from office-based microTESE. Fertilization rates, clinical pregnancies and live birth rates are comparable with those reported in the literature. Given the financial cost associated with microTESE and IVF/ICSI for nonobstructive azoospermia patients, office-based microTESE may be a solution to make the process more financially accessible for couples. Disclosure No.