부산대학교 도서관

Conclusion: The presented findings suggest that although successful SRRs of deep TESE were higher than that of its superficial counterpart, there was no significant statistical difference. A larger body of evidence is needed to provide a higher grade of recommendation. Objective: The purpose of the study was to compare the outcome of microscopic testicular sperm extraction (micro-TESE) between superficial and deep dissection on the same testicle in terms of sperm retrieval rate (SRR). Patients and Methods: In a retrospective study from June 2019 to October 2021, 44 patients with nonobstructive azoospermia who underwent micro-TESE with positive results (mature sperm identified) were included. Eight patients were excluded from the study due to deficient documentation on superficial and deep dissection. A total of 36 patients were included; 60 testicles were examined for superficial and deep biopsies. Testicular histopathology was performed in all patients, and a hormonal evaluation was obtained before the micro-TESE attempt. Results: Thirty-six patients and 60 testicles were included in the study. Of them, 47 (78.3%) testicles had positive results. Superficial TESE was positive in 38 (63.3%) testicles, and deep TESE was successful in 45 (75.0%) testicles. An improvement of 13.9% in the SRR was observed, following deep dissection. However, there was no statistically significant difference (P = 0.166). Rates of positive sperm retrieval (from any side) did not differ significantly based on patients' age, microdissection testicular sperm extraction sides, and hormonal concentrations; these differences were not apparent after superficial or deep TESE.