Delaying testicular sperm extraction in 47,XXY Klinefelter patients does not impair the sperm retrieval rate, and AMH levels are higher when TESE is positive.
Klinefelter syndrome
anti-Müllerian hormone
fertility preservation
male infertility
sperm retrieval
Journal
Human reproduction (Oxford, England)
ISSN: 1460-2350
Titre abrégé: Hum Reprod
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8701199
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
31 10 2022
31 10 2022
Historique:
received:
12
05
2022
revised:
25
08
2022
pubmed:
17
9
2022
medline:
4
11
2022
entrez:
16
9
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Should testicular sperm extraction (TESE) in non-mosaic 47,XXY Klinefelter syndrome (KS) patients be performed soon after puberty or could it be delayed until adulthood? The difference in sperm retrieval rate (SRR) in TESE was not significant between the 'Young' (15-22 years old) cohort and the 'Adult' (23-43 years old) cohort of non-mosaic KS patients recruited prospectively in parallel. Several studies have tried to define predictive factors for TESE outcome in non-mosaic KS patients, with very heterogeneous results. Some authors have found that age was a pejorative factor and recommended performing TESE soon after puberty. To date, no predictive factors have been unanimously recognized to guide clinicians in deciding to perform TESE in azoospermic KS patients. Two cohorts (Young: 15-22 years old; Adult: 23-43 years old) were included prospectively in parallel. A total of 157 non-mosaic 47,XXY KS patients were included between 2010 and 2020 in the reproductive medicine department of the University Hospital of Lyon, France. However 31 patients gave up before TESE, four had cryptozoospermia and three did not have a valid hormone assessment; these were excluded from this study. Data for 119 patients (61 Young and 58 Adult) were analyzed. All of these patients had clinical, hormonal and seminal evaluation before conventional TESE (c-TESE). The global SRR was 45.4%. SRRs were not significantly different between the two age groups: Young SRR=49.2%, Adult SRR = 41.4%; P = 0.393. Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) and inhibin B were significantly higher in the Young group (AMH: P = 0.001, Inhibin B: P < 0.001), and also higher in patients with a positive TESE than in those with a negative TESE (AMH: P = 0.001, Inhibin B: P = 0.036). The other factors did not differ between age groups or according to TESE outcome. AMH had a better predictive value than inhibin B. SRRs were significantly higher in the upper quartile of AMH plasma levels than in the lower quartile (or in cases with AMH plasma level below the quantification limit): 67.7% versus 28.9% in the whole population (P = 0.001), 60% versus 20% in the Young group (P = 0.025) and 71.4% versus 33.3% in the Adult group (P = 0.018). c-TESE was performed in the whole study; we cannot rule out the possibility of different results if microsurgical TESE had been performed. Because of the limited sensitivity of inhibin B and AMH assays, a large number of patients had values lower than the quantification limits, preventing the definition a threshold below which negative TESE can be predicted. In contrast to some studies, age did not appear as a pejorative factor when comparing patients 15-22 and 23-44 years of age. Improved accuracy of inhibin B and AMH assays in the future might still allow discrimination of patients with persistent foci of spermatogenesis and guide clinician decision-making and patient information. The study was supported by a grant from the French Ministry of Health D50621 (Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinical Régional 2008). The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. NCT01918280.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36112034
pii: 6702084
doi: 10.1093/humrep/deac203
pmc: PMC9627253
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Mullerian Hormone
80497-65-0
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT01918280']
Types de publication
Clinical Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2518-2531Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.
Références
J Urol. 2009 Sep;182(3):1108-13
pubmed: 19616796
Fertil Steril. 2012 Feb;97(2):319-23
pubmed: 22137495
Eur J Endocrinol. 2015 Jun;172(6):669-76
pubmed: 25740852
Reprod Biomed Online. 2009 Jun;18(6):756-60
pubmed: 19490778
Andrology. 2015 Sep;3(5):868-75
pubmed: 26235799
Andrologia. 2009 Apr;41(2):84-7
pubmed: 19260843
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1996 Feb;81(2):571-6
pubmed: 8636269
Fertil Steril. 2001 Jun;75(6):1102-5
pubmed: 11384633
Fertil Steril. 2013 Oct;100(4):970-4
pubmed: 23830150
PLoS One. 2018 Jul 25;13(7):e0200300
pubmed: 30044810
Hum Reprod. 2013 May;28(5):1155-60
pubmed: 23493114
Fertil Steril. 2020 Nov;114(5):997-1005
pubmed: 32868102
Fertil Steril. 2002 Jun;77(6):1167-9
pubmed: 12057723
Hum Reprod. 2018 Apr 1;33(4):636-645
pubmed: 29452353
Andrologia. 2012 Oct;44(5):349-54
pubmed: 21486417
J Endocrinol Invest. 2010 Dec;33(11):789-93
pubmed: 20332707
Hum Reprod. 2004 May;19(5):1135-9
pubmed: 15070870
J Clin Med. 2021 Mar 29;10(7):
pubmed: 33805395
Atomes. 1947 Nov;2(20):368-72
pubmed: 18904914
Hum Reprod Update. 2006 Jan-Feb;12(1):39-48
pubmed: 16172111
Clin Chem. 1989 Aug;35(8):1609-14
pubmed: 2758628
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010 Dec;95(12):5357-64
pubmed: 20843948
Lancet. 2004 Jul 17-23;364(9430):273-83
pubmed: 15262106
Andrology. 2020 Nov;8(6):1705-1711
pubmed: 32558292
Andrologia. 2022 Apr;54(3):e14303
pubmed: 34729809
Hum Reprod. 2013 Jun;28(6):1468-79
pubmed: 23539613
Hum Reprod Update. 2019 Nov 5;25(6):733-757
pubmed: 31665451
Hum Reprod. 1999 Jan;14(1):131-5
pubmed: 10374109
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2005 Nov;90(11):6263-7
pubmed: 16131585
Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2021 Jan 15;520:111080
pubmed: 33189865
Basic Clin Androl. 2021 Jun 17;31(1):15
pubmed: 34134632
Fertil Steril. 2001 Nov;76(5):1054-6
pubmed: 11704135
Andrologia. 2016 Mar;48(2):171-6
pubmed: 25929757
Acta Paediatr. 2011 Jun;100(6):839-45
pubmed: 21251056
Endocr Connect. 2018 Feb;7(2):347-354
pubmed: 29358304
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022 Jun 16;107(7):1878-1887
pubmed: 35396994
Andrology. 2014 Jul;2(4):623-31
pubmed: 24954116
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2007 Jan;24(1):47-51
pubmed: 17177108
Urology. 2006 Nov;68(5):1082-6
pubmed: 17095066
Urology. 2022 Mar;161:59-64
pubmed: 34968572
Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2018 May;88(5):711-718
pubmed: 29446828
Fertil Steril. 2011 Apr;95(5):1696-9
pubmed: 21295296
Rev Int Androl. 2021 Jan-Mar;19(1):9-15
pubmed: 31488364
Hum Reprod Update. 2017 May 1;23(3):265-275
pubmed: 28379559
Fertil Steril. 2015 Nov;104(5):1099-103.e1-3
pubmed: 26263080
Andrologia. 2018 Feb 20;:
pubmed: 29460304
Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2007 Dec;67(6):863-70
pubmed: 17645574
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007 Feb;92(2):714-9
pubmed: 17148558
Int J Fertil Steril. 2017 Jul-Sep;11(2):117-122
pubmed: 28670430
Andrology. 2020 May;8(3):680-687
pubmed: 31999885
Andrologia. 2021 Dec;53(11):e14220
pubmed: 34423455
Hum Reprod. 1998 Jul;13(7):1887-92
pubmed: 9740443
Fertil Steril. 2005 Dec;84(6):1662-4
pubmed: 16359961
Andrology. 2021 Jan;9(1):145-167
pubmed: 32959490
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2016 Nov;42(11):1558-1566
pubmed: 27785898
Hum Reprod. 2018 Jun 1;33(6):1009-1022
pubmed: 29684126
Hormones. 1970;1(1):2-25
pubmed: 5527187
N Engl J Med. 1998 Feb 26;338(9):588-90
pubmed: 9475766
Andrology. 2017 Jul;5(4):783-789
pubmed: 28544660
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2015 Mar;100(3):961-7
pubmed: 25423570
BMC Urol. 2020 Feb 27;20(1):21
pubmed: 32103742
Hum Reprod. 2016 Sep;31(9):1952-9
pubmed: 27412247
Urology. 2014 Jan;83(1):107-10
pubmed: 24210565
Hum Reprod. 2012 Apr;27(4):998-1004
pubmed: 22313866
Urology. 2007 Aug;70(2):341-5
pubmed: 17826503