Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Comparison of Classic Transverse Incision MicroTESE and Modified Mini-Incision MicroTESE in Non-Obstructive Azoospermic Patients.

Created on 29 Aug 2026

Authors

Mehmet Sefa Altay, Adem Utlu, Tugay Aksakalli, Ahmet Emre Cinislioglu, Emre Sam, Fevzi Bedir, Hüseyin Kocatürk, Ibrahim Karabulut, Saban Oguz Demirdogen, Isa Ozbey

Published in

Urologia internationalis. Pages 1. Aug 28, 2026. Epub Aug 28, 2026.

Abstract

Non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) primarily due to impaired spermatogenesis. Microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) is the gold standard for sperm retrieval in NOA patients. We compared sperm retrieval rates (SRR), operative time, and postoperative outcomes between classic transverse incision microTESE (CTI) and modified mini-incision microTESE (MMI).
In this retrospective study, 59 men with NOA underwent either CTI (n=33) or MMI (n=26) between 2021 and 2024. Preoperative and postoperative parameters, including SRR, operative time, complications, testosterone levels, testicular volume, and histopathology, were analyzed. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 21.
SRR was 34.6% in MMI and 39.4% in CTI (p=0.706). Operative time (46.5 ± 7.9 min vs. 64.7 ± 14.5 min, p=0.001) and postoperative pain scores (VAS 2.9 ± 0.7 vs. 4.4 ± 0.5, p=0.001) were significantly lower in MMI. No complications were observed. Histology revealed Sertoli cell-only syndrome in 14 and 19 patients in MMI and CTI groups, respectively; the remainder had maturation arrest or hypospermatogenesis. No complications such as infection, sperm granuloma, or androgen deficiency were observed in either group.
SRR was comparable between techniques. MMI was associated with shorter operative times and reduced postoperative discomfort.

PMID:
42664166
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 29 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 6
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement