Original Research

Comparison of Efficacy of Open Testicular Biopsy and SpermExtraction (TESE) versus Testicular Sperm Aspiration (TESA) interms of Sperm Retrieval Rate (SRR) in patients of Non-ObstructiveAzoospermia (NOA)

DOI https://doi.org/10.70302/jpsim.v7i2.2620
Received: 16 Jul 2025 Revised: 22 Apr 2026 Accepted: 03 May 2026 Published Online: 03 Jun 2026

Abstract

Objective

Objective of our study was to compare the yield of TESE versus TESA in terms of SRR in patients of NOA.

Methods

This randomized clinical trial was conducted in Department of Urology, Mayo Hospital Lahore. Patients diagnosed with NOA were selected and written informed consent was obtained. Baseline demographic and clinical information was recorded. Patients were then randomly allocated to two groups. Group A patients underwent TESE while TESA was performed in Group B patients. SRR of both groups were assessed and compared.

Results

Mean age of patients undergoing TESE and TESA was 29.73 ± 4.57 and 27.73 ± 4.88 years respectively (p = 0.766). Mean BMI of patients in undergoing TESE was 21.93 ± 1.24 kg/m2 while mean BMI of patients undergoing TESA was 22.46 ± 1.49 kg/m2 (p = 0.783). SRR of TESE was 66.6% while SRR of TESA was 40.0% (p = 0.038).

Conclusion

TESE was found to be more effective sperm retrieval technique in patients of NOA.

Keywords
Non-obstructive Azoospermia TESA TESE.

How to Cite This Article

Rehman A, Nasrullah F, Kamal A, Arshad B, Anwar J, Shahzaman S. Comparison of Efficacy of Open Testicular Biopsy and SpermExtraction (TESE) versus Testicular Sperm Aspiration (TESA) interms of Sperm Retrieval Rate (SRR) in patients of Non-ObstructiveAzoospermia (NOA). J Pak Soc Intern Med. 2026;7(2):101–103. doi:10.70302/jpsim.v7i2.2620

Conflict of Interest

All authors declare no competing interests.

Disclosed in accordance with ICMJE and COPE guidelines.

Funding

No specific funding was received for this research.

Funder information follows the Crossref Funder Registry standard.

References

  1. Sharma M, Leslie S. Azoospermia. StatPearls. 2023. Available from: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK578191/]
  2. Andrade DL, Viana MC, Esteves SC. Differential diagnosis of azoospermia in men with infertility. J Clin Med. 2021;10(14):3144.
  3. Cocuzza M, Alvarenga C, Pagani R. The epidemiology and etiology of azoospermia. Clinics. 2013;68(Suppl-1):15-26.
  4. Schlegel PN. Causes of azoospermia and their management. Reprod Fertil Dev. 2004;16(5):561-72.
  5. Chiba K, Enatsu N, Fujisawa M. Management of non-obstructive azoospermia. Reprod Med Biol. 2016;15(3):165-73.
  6. Donoso P, Tournaye H, Devroey P. Which is the best sperm retrieval technique for non-obstructive azoospermia? A systematic review. Human Reprod Update. 2007;13(6):539-49.
  7. Vloeberghs V, Verheyen G, Haentjens P, Goossens A, Polyzos NP, Tournaye H. How successful is TESE-ICSI in couples with non-obstructive azoospermia? Human Reprod. 2015;30(8):1790-6.
  8. Ishikawa T. Surgical recovery of sperm in non-obstructive azoospermia. Asian J Androl. 2012;14(1):109.
  9. Friedler S, Raziel A, Strassburger D, Soffer Y, Komarovsky D, Ron-El R. Testicular sperm retrieval by percutaneous fine needle sperm aspiration compared with testicular sperm extraction by open biopsy in men with non-obstructive azoospermia. Human Reprod. 1997;12(7):1488-93.
  10. Alrabeeah K, Yafi F, Flageole C, Phillips S, Wachter A, Bissonnette F, et al. Testicular sperm aspiration for nonazoospermic men: sperm retrieval and intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes. Urology. 2014;84(6):1342-6.
  11. Bernie AM, Mata DA, Ramasamy R, Schlegel PN. Comparison of microdissection testicular sperm extraction, conventional testicular sperm extraction, and testicular sperm aspiration for nonobstructive azoospermia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2015;104(5):1099-103.
  12. Ghaffar A, Ul Haq T, Akhter MS. Comparison of efficiency of testicular sperm extraction (TESE) with testicular sperm aspiration (TESA) for sperm retrieval in patients having azoospermia and identification of relevant predictive parameters. Pak J Med Health Sci. 2014;8(4):986-90.
  13. Nowroozi MR, Ahmadi H, Ayati M, Jamshidian H, Sirous A. Testicular fine-needle aspiration versus testicular open biopsy: comparable sperm retrieval rate in selected patients. Indian J Urol. 2012;28(1):37-42.
  14. Hauser R, Yogev L, Paz G, Yavetz H, Azem F, Lessing JB, et al. Comparison of efficacy of two techniques for testicular sperm retrieval in nonobstructive azoospermia: multifocal testicular sperm extraction versus multifocal testicular sperm aspiration. J Androl. 2006;27(1):28-33.

Reference list indexed for Google Scholar and ResearchGate. DOI links resolve via doi.org.

CC BY CC BY 4.0 This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. May be shared and adapted with attribution. © 2026 Journal of Pakistan Society of Internal Medicine.