2012, Number 3
<< Back Next >>
Rev Mex Med Repro 2012; 4.5 (3)
A current view of male infertility
Tapia SR
Language: Spanish
References: 21
Page: 103-109
PDF size: 89.94 Kb.
ABSTRACT
Male infertility is involved in almost 50% of cases as a factor in infertility in couples. The clinical and laboratory approach, especially semen analysis provides a basis for integrating a complementary study and arrives at a precise aetiological diagnosis that will successfully treat patients. Currently, patients diagnosed infertile because almost 90% and 70% are successfully treated recovered fertility. The methods of assisted reproduction should be a therapeutic end, never as initial therapy should be considered unique. In reproductive medicine clinics should involve a doctor specializing in andrology, and if the clinic does not consider it necessary, apply the proverb: “The eyes can not see what the mind does not know.”
REFERENCES
Mosher WD. Reproductive impairments in the United States, 1965-1982. Demography 1985; 22:415-30.
Sigman M, Lipshultz IL, Howards SS. Office evaluation of the subfertile male. In: Infertility in the male. 4th ed. Larry I Lipshultz, Stuart S Howards and Craig S Niederberger by Cambridge University Press, 2009;153.
WHO: Laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen. 5th ed. World Health Organization Press, 2010.
Kruger TF, Menkveld R, Stander FS, Lombard CJ, Vander Merwe JP, et al. Sperm morphology features as a prognostic factor in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1986;46:1118-1123.
Rojas RJ. Comparación del análisis de semen según la OMS 1999 y 2010 y su impacto en el diagnóstico del varón infértil. Rev Mex Med Reprod 2011;4:17.
Tapia SR. Semiología del análisis de semen. Bol Col Mex Urol 2003;2-6.
Gilson R, Mindel A: Sexually transmitted infections. Research BMJ 2001;322: 1160-1164.
Rojas J, Bravo C, Salas R, Moreno J, Tapia R. Genital micoplasmas and its impact on sperm samples in infertile men. Medical Publications 2001;15-19.
Chemes HE. Review phenotypes of sperm pathology: genetic and acquired form in nfertile men. J Androl 2000:21:799-808.
Chemes HE, Olmedo SB, Carrere C, Oses R, Carizza C, et al. Ultraestructural pathology of the sperm flagellum; association between flagellar pathology and fertility prognosis in severely asthenozoospermic men. Human Reprod 1998;13:2521-2526.
Turek PJ, Lipshultz LI. Immunologic infertility. Urol Clin North Am 1994; 21: 447-468.
Culligan PJ, Crane MM, Boone WR, et al. Validity and costeffectiveness of antisperm antibody testing before in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1998; 69: 894-898.
Davenport M, Brain C, Vandemberg C, Zappala S, Duffy P et al.: The use of the hCG simulation test in the endocrine evaluation of cryptorchidism. Br J Urol 1995;76:790-794.
Simoni M, Bakker E, Eurlings MC, Matthijs G, Moro E et al.: Laboratory guidelines for molecular diagnosis of Y-chromosomal microdelections. Int J Androl 1999;22:292-299.
Schlegel PN, Palermo GD, Goldstein M, et al. Testicular sperm extraction with intracytoplasmic sperm injection for non-obstructive azoospermia. Urology 1997; 49: 435-440.
Tournaye H, Verheyen G, Nagy P, Ubaldi F, Goosens A et al.: Are there any predictive factors for successful testicular sperm recovery in azoospermic patiens? Hum Reprod 1997;12:80-86.
Regadera J, Nistal M: Biopsia testicular en infertilidad. Madrid, Harcourt, 2001:4-15
Rifkin DM, Cochlin LD: Male infertility in imaging of the scrotum & penis. Martin Dunitz, 2002:171-189.
Alvarez JG. The predictive value of the sperm chromatin structure assay. Hum Reprod 2005; 20: 2365-2367.
Saleh RA, Agarwal A, Nelson DR, et al. Increased sperm nuclear DNA damage in normozoospermic infertile men: a prospective study. Fertil Steril 2002; 78: 313-318.
Sharma RK, Pasqualotto FF, Nelson DR, Thomas AJ, Agarwal A. The reactive oxygen species-total antioxidant capacity score is a new measure of oxidative stress to predict male infertility. Hum Reprod 1999;14:2801-2807.