Sperm retrieval, fertilization rates, and clinical outcomes of infertile men with Y chromosome microdeletion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We aimed to explore whether a Y chromosome microdeletion (YCM) confers adverse effects on surgical sperm retrieval potential and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) outcomes in men with azoospermia and severe oligospermia. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study that included infertile men with azoospermia or severe oligospermia who were evaluated for karyotype analysis and YCM testing at a university-affiliated hospital between 2010 and 2022. Outcomes of microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) for surgical sperm retrieval were compared between men diagnosed with YCM and the control group, in which no YCM was found. Additionally, patients from each group who underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF)-ICSI cycle using ejaculated sperm or surgically retrieved mature spermatozoa were compared regarding their IVF-ICSI cycle outcomes, fertilization rates, cleavage, and blastocyst formation, and clinical pregnancy rates. RESULTS: A total of 116 azoospermic and oligospermic men who underwent YCM testing were included in the study: 19 with YCM and 97 without. Overall, nine mTESE procedures were performed for patients with YCM and 38 for men from the control group. There were no significant differences between the YCM and control groups in mature sperm retrieval rates (11.1% vs. 26.3%, p=0.663), although a trend towards higher rates of elongated and round spermatids as the most mature germ cell was noted in the YCM group (66.7% vs. 28.9%, p=0.054). Of the 13 men with mature sperm - either ejaculated or surgically retrieved (mTESE) - that had known ICSI cycle outcomes, three men had proven YCMs and 10 controls had no identified YCMs. Basic characteristics were similar between the groups, except for testosterone levels, which were higher in the YCM group (23.0±13.1 vs. 9.4±6.4 nmol/L, p=0.027). Fertilization rates and cleavage rates were similar between the YCM and control groups (42.3% vs. 49.7% and 42.3% vs. 39.3%, p=0.491 and 0.774, respectively). Blastocyst formation rates, and pregnancy rates, while not statistically significant, showed a trend for favorable outcomes in the control group compared to the YCM group (24.1% vs. 7.7%, 72.7% vs. 20.0%, p=0.078 and 0.106, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: YCM does not affect sperm retrieval rates. Fertilization and cleavage rates are not impaired by microdeletions, while blastocyst formation rates and clinical pregnancy rates per embryo transfer follow a non-significant trend for unfavorable outcomes in the YCM group. Clinical and embryonic development results should be interpreted with caution, as these groups are relatively small.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".