Microsurgical varicocelectomy for infertile men with oligospermia: differential effect of bilateral and unilateral varicocele on pregnancy outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the pregnancy outcomes of two groups of oligospermic men with varicocele, one having a varicocelectomy (group 1) and the other electing not to have surgery (group 2), as varicocele represents the most common factor associated with male infertility and most reports indicate that varicocelectomy has a beneficial effect on male fertility and pregnancy outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed consecutive oligospermic men who had microsurgical varicocelectomy (233, group 1) between September 1996 and January 2002 and a consecutive group of oligospermic men with varicoceles who elected not to have surgery (127, group 2). The outcome measures included changes in semen variables, partner pregnancy rates (assisted and unassisted) and use of assisted reproductive technologies (ART). RESULTS: The mean sperm concentration and motility increased significantly after varicocelectomy (P < 0.05). The natural pregnancy rate in group 1 (38%) was higher than in group 2 (30%). The use of ART was significantly greater in group 2 than group 1. In the subset of couples with bilateral varicocele, the natural pregnancy rate was significantly higher in group 1 than group 2 (48% vs 15%, respectively, P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the natural pregnancy rate is higher after varicocelectomy than in those not having surgery, although the difference was not statistically significant. However, in the subset of couples with bilateral varicocele, the spontaneous pregnancy rates were significantly higher after surgery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".