International journal of reproductive biomedicine · 2026
Comparison of intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes in men with spinal cord injury using sperm retrieved by electroejaculation and testicular sperm extraction methods: A retrospective cohort study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Haghdani Saeid, Vahidi Serajoddin, Sadeghi Ali, Gholami Banadkuki Narges
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) face fertility concerns due to various causes, such as low sperm quality and ejaculatory dysfunction. Consequently, different sperm retrieval techniques are used for these cases, including testicular sperm extraction (TESE) and electroejaculation (EE). Clinical and neonatal outcomes have been reported inconsistently between these 2 methods.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the chemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rate in men with SCI undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection using sperm obtained via EE vs. TESE.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted between 2017 and 2023. 37 men with SCI underwent 2 different sperm retrieval techniques. Sperm was retrieved using EE in 18 cycles, while TESE was performed in 36 cycles. Then, chemical, clinical, and live birth rates were reported.
RESULTS: Overall, 21 (38.8%) chemical pregnancies were obtained. Moreover, 19 (35.18%) clinical pregnancies were achieved. The live birth rate was 20.3%. No statistically significant differences were observed between the EE and TESE groups in terms of chemical pregnancy (44.4% vs. 36.1%, p = 0.55), clinical pregnancy (33.3% vs. 36.1%, p = 0.89), or live birth rates (22.2% vs. 19.4%, p = 0.81).
CONCLUSION: Both retrieval techniques, EE and TESE, can be applicable strategies for intracytoplasmic sperm injection procedures in men with SCI with no discrepancy in pregnancy outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the chemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rate in men with SCI undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection using sperm obtained via EE vs. TESE.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted between 2017 and 2023. 37 men with SCI underwent 2 different sperm retrieval techniques. Sperm was retrieved using EE in 18 cycles, while TESE was performed in 36 cycles. Then, chemical, clinical, and live birth rates were reported.
RESULTS: Overall, 21 (38.8%) chemical pregnancies were obtained. Moreover, 19 (35.18%) clinical pregnancies were achieved. The live birth rate was 20.3%. No statistically significant differences were observed between the EE and TESE groups in terms of chemical pregnancy (44.4% vs. 36.1%, p = 0.55), clinical pregnancy (33.3% vs. 36.1%, p = 0.89), or live birth rates (22.2% vs. 19.4%, p = 0.81).
CONCLUSION: Both retrieval techniques, EE and TESE, can be applicable strategies for intracytoplasmic sperm injection procedures in men with SCI with no discrepancy in pregnancy outcomes.