Search

Purpose: Epididymal cyst lesions (ECLs) include both spermatoceles and epididymal cysts and are often incidentally found on physical exam or scrotal US (SUS). We aimed to determine the association of ECLs and semen parameters among men presenting for fertility evaluation., Materials and Methods: We reviewed men at our institution who had at least 1 semen analysis and SUS available for review between 2002 and 2022. SUS data included testicular measurements, presence or absence of subclinical varicocele, and size and laterality of ECL, if present. Demographic and clinical information including serum testosterone and follicle-stimulating hormone and semen parameters were compared between men with and without ECLs., Results: Among 861 men, 164 (19%) had unilateral right ECL (median 4 mm, interquartile range 3-8 mm), 189 (22%) had unilateral left ECL (median 4 mm, interquartile range 3-9 mm), and 113 (13%) had bilateral ECL. Patients with ECLs were significantly older than men without ECLs at the time of evaluation but had no statistically significant difference in semen volume, sperm concentration, sperm motility, sperm morphology, total motile sperm count, or serum hormonal values. Analysis of men with unilateral and bilateral ECLs showed that ECL size and laterality did not significantly correlate with any semen parameter evaluated., Conclusions: We found no association between ECLs and semen parameters. Patients should be counseled toward conservative management with observation for asymptomatic ECLs in the setting of fertility evaluation.

Objective: To examine the association between selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) use and semen quality., Methods: We performed a retrospective review of all men undergoing semen analysis (SA) for fertility evaluation from 2002-2020 at a single academic medical center. Men were excluded if they had prior exposure to spermatotoxic medications, clomiphene citrate, gonadotropins, selective estrogen receptor modulators, or medical conditions known to impact male fertility. SSRI exposure was defined by an outpatient prescription within 90 days prior to any semen test. Differences between men with and without SSRI exposure were assessed with Wilcoxon rank sum for continuous variables and chi-squared testing for proportions. Univariable and multivariable linear regression models were fit to evaluate the relationship between SSRI use and individual semen parameters, controlling for age at the time of the semen analysis and non-SSRI drug use., Results: A total of 8861 men were identified, of whom 153 men (1.7%) were exposed to SSRIs prior to SA. Median age was 35 years (interquartile range: 32-39) and was similar between groups (P = .999). Non-SSRI medication use was significantly higher in men taking SSRIs (78.4% vs 23.3%, < .001). On univariable and multivariable analyses, SSRI exposure was not associated with differences in semen volume, sperm concentration, motility, total motile sperm count, or normal morphology., Conclusion: In adult men undergoing fertility evaluation, SSRI exposure was not associated with impaired semen parameters. These data may help inform reproductive counseling and medical decision-making regarding SSRI use in men seeking paternity., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To evaluate the predictors of establishing care with a reproductive urologist (RU) among men with abnormal semen analyses (SAs) ordered by nonurologists and examine patient perceptions of abnormal SAs in the absence of RU consultation., Design: Retrospective cohort study with cross-sectional survey., Setting: Large, integrated academic healthcare system during 2002-2019., Patient(s): We identified adult men undergoing initial SAs with nonurologists who had abnormalities. Patients with index SAs during 2002-2018 were included for the analysis of RU consultation. Men tested in 2019 were recruited for cross-sectional survey., Intervention(s): Cross-sectional survey., Main Outcome Measure(s): RU consultation and accurate perception of abnormal SAs., Result(s): A total of 2,283 men had abnormal SAs ordered by nonurologists, among whom 20.5% underwent RU consultation. Mixed-effect logistic regression modeling identified oligospermia as the strongest predictor of RU care (odds ratio, 3.08; 95% confidence interval, 2.43-3.90) with a significant provider-level random intercept. We observed substantial provider-level heterogeneity among nonurologists with provider-specific rates of RU evaluation ranging from 3.7% to 35.8%. We contacted 310 men who did not undergo RU consultation with a 27.2% survey response rate. Of respondents, 6.7% reported receiving an RU referral. Among men with abnormal SAs not evaluated by RU, 22.7% appropriately perceived an abnormal SA., Conclusion(s): In men with abnormal SAs diagnosed by nonurologists, the rate of RU consultation was low and associated with substantial provider-level variation among ordering providers. Patients without RU consultation reported inaccurate perceptions of their SA. Multidisciplinary efforts are needed to ensure that subfertile men receive appropriate RU evaluation., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To determine prevalence of hyperprolactinemia and prolactinoma among men presenting for initial fertility evaluation., Methods: We performed a retrospective review of men presenting for initial fertility evaluation at a tertiary care, academic health system between 1999 and 2018. Men with measured prolactin levels were analyzed to determine prevalence of hyperprolactinemia and prolactinoma. We compared clinical characteristics of men with and without hyperprolactinemia. Univariable and multivariable analysis were used to determine factors associated with hyperprolactinemia. We assessed effects of hyperprolactinemia and prolactinoma on testosterone levels, semen parameters and pregnancy outcomes after treatment., Results: A total of 3101 men had serum prolactin level measured. 65 (2.1%) had hyperprolactinemia. Patients with hyperprolactinemia had lower testosterone (median 280 ng/dL vs 313 ng/dL, P = 0.038) and lower total motile sperm count (median 7.0 million vs 34.7 million, P = 0.001) compared to men without hyperprolactinemia. 43.1% of men with hyperprolactinemia had oligospermia vs 21.5% of men without hyperprolactinemia (P<0.001). Univariable analysis demonstrated that men with elevated luteinizing hormone (LH) (OR 1.077, P = 0.001) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) (OR 1.032, P = 0.002) were more likely to have hyperprolactinemia. Men with oligospermia were more likely to have hyperprolactinemia (OR 2.334, P = 0.004). On multivariable analysis, neither hormone parameters nor oligospermia were associated with elevated prolactin (P>0.05). Of the 65 men with hyperprolactinemia, 11 (17%) were diagnosed with a prolactinoma, resulting in an overall prevalence of 11 in 3101 (0.35%)., Conclusion: The overall prevalence of prolactinoma in our cohort of men undergoing fertility evaluation was 35-fold higher than the prevalence in the general male population., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To determine whether health-conscious men are more likely to be concerned about infertility and self-initiate semen analysis at a laboratory/clinic or through a direct-to-consumer at-home product without a health care provider recommendation., Methods: Cross-sectional survey conducted online via ResearchMatch.org between November 2019 and January 2020. Men age 18 and older without children (n = 634) were included for analysis. Outcomes were likelihood of self-initiating a semen analysis, prevalence of infertility concern., Results: Of the 634 participants, 186 expressed concern about infertility but only 29% were likely to discuss these concerns with a health care provider. More men would self-initiate a semen analysis using an at-home product than through a traditional laboratory/clinic (14.2% vs 10.4%, P = .04). Odds of self-initiating a traditional semen analysis were higher for men concerned about low testosterone (odds ratio [OR] 2.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-4.74, P = .023) and infertility (OR 3.91, 95% CI 2.14-7.15, P <.001). Self-initiating an at-home semen analysis was associated with concern for low testosterone and infertility as well as middle age (age 40-59: OR 3.02, 95% CI 1.16-7.88, P = .024) and fitness tracker use (OR: 1.95, 95% CI 1.12-3.39, P = .018)., Conclusion: Many men were unlikely to discuss infertility concerns with a health care provider. Middle aged men and those who used fitness trackers were more likely to self-initiate fertility evaluation through at-home semen analysis. Concern about low serum testosterone was pervasive and strongly associated with concern for being infertile and self-initiating a semen analysis of any kind., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To determine the distribution of semen parameters among adolescent and adult males presenting for fertility preservation., Methods: A retrospective, cross-sectional cohort study of adolescent males age 11-19 who underwent semen analysis for fertility preservation at 3 centers in 2 countries with a comparison cohort of adult men presenting for fertility preservation. Prevalence of azoospermia and distribution of semen parameters was compared across groups., Results: A total of 197 adolescents and 95 adults underwent semen analysis for fertility preservation. Azoospermia was present in 17 (8.6%) adolescents and 3 (3.2%) adults. There was decline in the prevalence of azoospermia with increasing age. After exclusion of patients with azoospermia, the adolescent and adult cohorts were comprised of 180 and 92 patients, respectively. Median age at presentation among adolescents vs adults was 16.5years (interquartile range [IQR] 15.2-17.6) and 30.8years (IQR 22.7-43.8), respectively. Median semen volume was 1.0mL (IQR 0.5-2.0) vs 2.5mL (IQR 1.5-3.5), P <.001. Median sperm concentration was 30million/mL (IQR 10-57) vs 39million/mL (IQR 14-57), P = .2. Median sperm motility was 39% (IQR 20-55) vs 45% (IQR 35-55), P = .01. Median total motile sperm count was 11million (IQR 1.4-33) for adolescents vs 29million (IQR 13-69) for adults, P <.001., Conclusion: Young adolescent males had higher prevalence of azoospermia and lower semen parameters compared to adults. In conjunction with physical examination, Tanner stage, and specific clinical context, these data can help to inform patients and their families about potential for fertility preservation, even in very young adolescent patients., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)