Table 1.
Comparison of ICSI cycles using fresh vs frozen–thawed surgical retrieved testicular sperm
| Publication | Freezing methodology | Compared with | Frozen NOA cycles, n | Fresh cycles, n | Fertilisation rate (2 PN%), % |
Good embryo, % |
CPR/ET, % |
IR, % |
LBR/ET, % |
Significant results | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frozen sperm | Fresh sperm | Frozen sperm | Fresh sperm | Frozen sperm | Fresh sperm | Frozen sperm | Fresh sperm | Frozen sperm | Fresh sperm | ||||||
| Friedler et al., 1997 [16] | Testicular tissue, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then nitrogen vapour chamber (–10°C/min) for 20 min | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 14 | 25 | 43.5 | 60.7 | 77.1 | 77.4 | 21.4 | 24.0 | 10.8 | 8.8 | 9.1 | 21.7 | No difference in 2 PN%, embryo quality, CPR, IR and LBR between the two studied groups |
| Ben-Yosef et al., 1999 [17] | Testicular sperm suspension, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then Nicool Semi-programmable freezer (two steps) (Figure 2) | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 42 | 15 | 55.5 | 53.8 | 74.6 | 66.1 | 21.4 | 26.7 | 10.7 | 12.5 | 16.7 | 20.0 | No difference in 2 PN%, embryo quality, CPR, IR and LBR between the two studied groups |
| Habermann et al., 2000 [18] | Testicular sperm suspension, TEST-citrate-yolk buffer with 12% glycerol then two step controlled cooling | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA (OA cases were also compared) | 9 | 3 | 55.7 | 51.6 | 66.7 | 33.3 | 24.1 | 12.5 | 33.3 | 33.3 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR, IR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||
| Fukunaga et al., 2001 [19] | Testicular sperm suspension, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then 15 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (OA cases were also compared) | 11 | 9 | 9.1 | 33.3 | No difference in CPR between the two studied groups but the frozen sperm CPR was significantly lower in NOA than OA cases | ||||||||
| Friedler et al., 2002 [20] | Testicular sperm suspension, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then nitrogen vapour-containing chamber (–10°C/min) | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (OA cases were also compared) | 63 | 65 | 51.0 | 51.0 | 25.8 | 27.1 | 17.4 | 12.7 | 23.8 | 24.6 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR, IR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||
| Sousa et al., 2002 [21] | Testicular sperm suspension, sperm freezing medium (Medicult) then 10–15 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (spermatid injection cases were also studied) | 37 | 50 | 60.0 | 68.2 | 84.2 | 86.8 | 24.3 | 34.0 | No difference in 2 PN%, embryo quality, CPR between the two studied groups | ||||
| Verheyen et al., 2004 [22] | Testicular sperm suspension, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then 16 min in LNV (two steps) | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 42 | 44 | 59.3 | 58.0 | 18.7 | 17.1 | 7.4 | 7.6 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR and IR between the 2 studied groups | ||||
| Hauser et al., 2005 [23] | Testicular tissue, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then Nicool semi-programmable freezer (two steps) (Figure 2) | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases versus own frozen sperms | 13 | 13 | 35.2 | 41.8 | 66.7 | 61.5 | 15.4 | 18.2 | 5.9 | 10.5 | 15.4 | 18.2 | No difference in 2 PN%, embryo quality, CPR and IR between the two studied groups |
| Wu et al., 2005 [24] | Testicular tissue, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then 15 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA and OA cases | 24 | 6 | 65.8 | 74.5 | 53.8 | 52.9 | 62.5 | 33.3 | 25.0 | 15.8 | 41.7 | 33.3 | Differences in CPR, IR and LBR between the frozen (better) and the fresh group |
| Konc et al., 2008 [25] | Testicular tissue, sperm freeze (FertiPro) then 15 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 93 | 64 | 66.4 | 63.6 | 23.7 | 31.3 | 6.6 | 10.8 | 18.3 | 15.6 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR, IR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||
| Akarsu et al., 2009 [26] | Sperm freezing protocol was not mentioned | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 2 | 4 | 19.4 | 57.8 | 0.0 | 75.0 | 0.0 | 75.0 | No difference in 2 PN% and CPR between the two studied groups | ||||
| Kalsi et al. 2010 [27] | Testicular sperm suspension, sperm freezing med. (unspecified) then 15 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (OA cases were also compared) | 7 | 41 | 63.4 | 50.8 | 57.1 | 36.6 | 57.1 | 31.7 | A difference in CPR and LBR in favour of the frozen sperm group | ||||
| Karacan et al. 2013 [28] | Testicular sperm suspension, Sperm Freeze (FertiPro) then 30 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (OA cases were also compared) | 84 | 99 | 64.7 | 67.2 | 23.8 | 29.2 | 12.3 | 12.6 | 21.4 | 27.2 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR, IR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||
| Abdel Raheem et al. 2013 [29] | Testicular tissue, sperm freezing med. (Medicult) then controlled rate freezer (two steps) | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (OA cases were also compared) | 46 | 31 | 45.7 | 56.0 | 85.0 | 88.0 | 34.8 | 29.1 | 19.6 | 19.4 | No difference in 2 PN%, embryo quality, CPR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||
| Tavukcuoglu et al. 2013 [30] | Testicular tissue, sperm freezing med. (Vitrolife) then nitrogen vapour-containing Styrofoam box 20–30 min | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 39 | 43 | 46.8 | 44.8 | 51.3 | 58.1 | 43.6 | 44.2 | 30.8 | 37.2 | No difference in 2 PN%, embryo quality, CPR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||
| Madureira et al. 2014 [31] | Testicular sperm suspension, sperm freezing med. (Origio) then LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (Non-mosaic KF cases) | 17 | 20 | 43.2 | 60.0 | 55.4 | 75.6 | 23.5 | 60.0 | 17.2 | 34.1 | 23.5 | 50.0 | Differences in 2 PN%, embryo quality and CPR in favour of the fresh sperm group |
| Hessel et al. 2015 [32] | Testicular sperm suspension, test yolk buffer (Irvine) then 5–10 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 600 | 145 | 22.3 | 21.3 | 21.0 | 20.6 | No difference in CPR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||||||
| Park et al. 2015 [33] | Testicular tissue, cryosperm med. (Medicult) then computerised cell freezer (CryoMagic-Plus; two steps) | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 49 | 61 | 68.5 | 59.6 | 66.3 | 64.5 | 38.1 | 22.0 | 56.3 | 21.3 | 4.8 | 12.2 | A difference in IR in favour of the frozen sperm group |
| Schachter-Safrai et al. 2017 [34] | Testicular sperm suspension, sperm freezing med. (Origio) then nitrogen vapour in a plastic freezing box (–1°C/min) |
Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (cryptozoospermic cases were also compared) | 48 | 22 | 49.0 | 52.1 | 18.8 | 18.2 | 12.2 | 7.3 | 18.8 | 4.5 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR, LBR and IR between the two studied groups | ||
| Okuyama et al. 2018 [35] | Testicular sperm suspension, sperm freeze (Medi-con) then 15 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (Fresh oocytes) (OA cases and cryptozoospermic cases were also compared) | 78 | 71 | 52.6 | 59.4 | 34.3 | 49.3 | 12.5 | 31.5 | A difference in LBR in favour of the fresh sperm group | ||||
| Falah 2019 [36] | Testicular sperm suspension, sperm freeze (FertiPro) then 15 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases (OA cases were also compared) | 36 | 32 | 36.0 | 37.0 | 14.3 | 20.0 | 3.6 | 4.0 | No difference in 2 PN%, CPR and LBR between the two studied groups | ||||
| Zhang et al. 2021 [37] | Testicular sperm suspension, sperm freezing med. (Vitrolife) then 30 min in LNV | Fresh testicular sperm from NOA cases | 110 | 234 | 44.2 | 47.6 | 53.7 | 52.1 | 40.5 | 52.3 | 33.5 | 36.2 | 34.5 | 48.7 | Differences in CPR and LBR in favour of the fresh sperm group |
ET: embryo transfer; IR, implantation rate; LBR: live-birth rate; LNV: liquid nitrogen vapour; med.: medium.