<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE Articles SYSTEM "HBI_DTD">


<journal>
<language>en</language>
<journal_id_issn>1726-7536</journal_id_issn>
<journal_id_issn_online>1735-8507</journal_id_issn_online>
<journal_id_pii></journal_id_pii>
<journal_id_doi></journal_id_doi>
<journal_id_isnet></journal_id_isnet>
<journal_id_iranmedex>69</journal_id_iranmedex>
<journal_id_magiran>2139</journal_id_magiran>
<journal_id_sid>288</journal_id_sid>
<pubdate PubStatus="epublish">
	<type>gregorian</type>
	<year>2018</year>
	<month>5</month>
	<day>5</day>
</pubdate>
<volume>19</volume>
<number>2</number>
<publish_type>online</publish_type>
<publish_edition>1</publish_edition>
<article_type>fulltext</article_type>
<articleset>

<article>
	<language>en</language>
	<article_id_issn></article_id_issn>
	<article_id_issn_online></article_id_issn_online>
	<article_id_pubmed>30009146</article_id_pubmed>
	<article_id_pii></article_id_pii>
	<article_id_doi></article_id_doi>
	<article_id_iranmedex></article_id_iranmedex>
	<article_id_magiran></article_id_magiran>
	<article_id_sid></article_id_sid>
	<title_fa></title_fa>
	<title>To What Extent Are Cryopreserved Sperm and Testicular Biopsy Samples Used in Assisted Reproduction?</title>
	<subject_fa></subject_fa>
	<subject></subject>
	<content_type_fa></content_type_fa>
	<content_type></content_type>
	<abstract_fa></abstract_fa>
	<abstract>&lt;p&gt;Background: Testicular biopsies and ejaculated spermatozoa are routinely cryo-preserved in many units but the fate of these samples has not provoked large interest. This prompted us to review our data accumulated during a period of 20 years (1997 to 2016).&lt;br /&gt;
Methods: For patients with biopsies (group 1) or ejaculated spermatozoa (group 2), an attempt was made to evaluate whether the samples&amp;nbsp; stored, had been discarded with the patient&amp;rsquo;s consent or because the patient had died, or whether they had been transported to another laboratory. In each of these categories, a previous use in our program of assisted reproduction was assessed.&lt;br /&gt;
Results: The total utilization rate in group 1 (n=95) was 53.7% and only 5.48% in group 2 (n=365). In both groups, deceased patients had not previously used their cryopreserved samples. In detail, the utilization rates for still banked, discarded and transferred samples were 84.2%, 50% and 27.3%, respectively in group 1 and 2.88%, 10.4% and 10%, respectively in group 2.&lt;br /&gt;
Conclusion: The exact reasons for the low utilization rates of cryopreserved male gametes remain to be explored. A closer contact between sperm banking units and patients might be useful to discuss the need for further storage of the probes, their possible disposal or the prospects when a specific use for assisted reproduction is intended.&lt;/p&gt;
</abstract>
	<keyword_fa></keyword_fa>
	<keyword>Assisted reproduction, Cryopreservation, Male fertility preservation, Spermatozoa, Testicular biopsy</keyword>
	<start_page>115</start_page>
	<end_page>119</end_page>
	<web_url>https://www.jri.ir/article/10013</web_url>
	<pdf_url>https://www.jri.ir/documents/fullpaper/en/10013.pdf</pdf_url>
	<author_list><author><first_name>Bernd</first_name><middle_name></middle_name><last_name>Rosenbusch</last_name><suffix></suffix><affiliation>Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany</affiliation><first_name_fa></first_name_fa><middle_name_fa></middle_name_fa><last_name_fa></last_name_fa><suffix_fa></suffix_fa><email>bernd.rosenbusch@uniklinik-ulm.de</email><code>11789</code><coreauthor></coreauthor><affiliation_fa></affiliation_fa></author></author_list>
</article>

</articleset>
</journal>

