MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412493324 · doi:10.5534/wjmh.250065

The Effects of Varicocele Repair on Testicular Sperm Retrieval, Sperm Recovery in the Ejaculate and Clinical Pregnancy Rates in Non-Obstructive Azoospermic Men with Clinical Varicocele: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2025· review· en· W4412493324 on OpenAlexaff
Selahíttín Çayan, Germar‐Michael Pinggera, Hiva Alipour, Barış Altay, Rupin Shah, Carlo Giulioni, Taymour Mostafa, Taha Abo-Almagd Abdel-Meguid Hamoda, Durán Alarcón, Fereshteh Dardmeh, S. Daoud, Noor Fathalla, Sezgin Güneş, Tan V. Le, Ranjit B. Vishwakarma, ‬Ahmed M. Harraz, Mohamed Arafa, Rossella Cannarella, Amarnath Rambhatla, Armand Zini, Eric Chung, Widi Atmoko, Ayad Palani, Luca Boeri, Aldo E. Calogero, Т. В. Шатылко, Manaf Al Hashimi, Ashok Agarwal

Bibliographic record

VenueThe World Journal of Men s Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSperm and Testicular Function
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVaricoceleMedicineTesticular sperm extractionSperm RetrievalIntracytoplasmic sperm injectionSpermAssisted reproductive technologyGynecologyPregnancy rateAzoospermiaMale infertilityInfertilityPregnancyAndrologyUrologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The role of varicocele repair (VR) in infertile men with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) and varicocele is controversial in the current guidelines, despite available studies. This study aims to assess the impact of VR on testicular sperm retrieval, sperm recovery from the ejaculate, and clinical pregnancy rates in infertile men with NOA and clinical varicocele through a systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) of controlled studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using the Scopus and PubMed databases up to November 2023. Among the 1,847 articles retrieved, five observational controlled studies comparing reproductive outcomes between infertile men with NOA and clinical varicocele who underwent VR, and a control group that received no treatment, met the inclusion criteria for this SRMA. RESULTS: The selected studies included 269 men with NOA who underwent VR before the testicular sperm extraction (TESE) procedure and 364 men who did not undergo VR. The pooled estimate demonstrated a significantly higher odds ratio (OR) of 2.17 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.17-4.01, p=0.01) for surgical sperm retrieval in the VR group. VR significantly increased the likelihood of sperm appearance in the ejaculate, with an OR of 7.8 (95% CI: 3.59-16.94, p<0.001). Besides, VR provided a significantly greater clinical pregnancy rate with intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) compared to non-operated men (OR: 2.18, 95% CI: 1.03-4.60; p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first SRMA, consisting of only controlled studies, to demonstrate that VR performed prior to TESE in men with NOA significantly improves sperm production as reflected in the spontaneous appearance of sperm in the semen and higher odds of surgical sperm retrieval and clinical pregnancy compared with non-operated men. Thus, these findings highlight the potentially beneficial impact of VR in men with NOA and clinical varicocele.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.034
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.353 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe World Journal of Men s HealthSame topicSperm and Testicular FunctionFrench-language works237,207