Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To characterize the demographic differences between infertile/sub-fertile women who utilized infertility services vs. those that do not. METHODS:A retrospective analysis of cross-sectional data obtained during the 2011-2013, 2013-2015, and 2015-2017 cycles of National Survey for Family Growth from interviews administered in home for randomly selected participants by a National Center of Health Statistics (NCHS) surveyor was used to analyze married, divorced, or women with long-term partners who reported difficulty having biological children (sub-fertile/infertile women). Demographic differences such as formal marital status, education, race, and religion were compared between women who presented for infertility care vs. those that did not. The primary outcome measure was presenting for infertility evaluation and subsequently utilizing infertility services. Healthcare utilization trends such as having a usual place of care and insurance status were also included as exposures of interest in the analysis. RESULTS:Of the 12,456 women included in the analysis 1770 (15.3%) had used infertility services and 1011 (8.3%) said it would be difficult for them to have a child but had not accessed infertility services. On univariate analysis, compared to women who used infertility services, untreated women had lower average household incomes (295.3 vs. 229.8% of the federal poverty line respectively). Untreated women also had lower levels of education and were more likely to be divorced or never have married. In terms of health status, unevaluated women were less likely to have a usual place for healthcare (87.3%) as compared to women presenting for fertility care (91.9%) (p = 0.004). When examining insurance status, 23.3% of unevaluated women were uninsured as compared to 8.3% of evaluated women. On multivariate analysis, infertile women without insurance were at 0.37 odds of utilizing infertility care compared to women with insurance. CONCLUSIONS:Demographic factors are associated with the utilization of infertility care. Insurance status is a significant predictor of whether or not infertile women will access treatment. Data from the three most recent NSFG surveys along with prior analyses demonstrate the need for expanded insurance coverage in order to address the socioeconomic disparities between infertile women who are accessing services vs. those that are not.

Obstructive azoospermia (OA) is a rare cause of male infertility, with Congenital Bilateral Absence of The Vas Deferens (CBAVD) being a major cause. A wealth of literature has established an irrefutable link between CFTR mutations and CBAVD, with CBAVD affecting almost all men with cystic fibrosis (CF) disease and a significant portion of men that are CFTR mutation carriers. In the past two decades, assisted reproductive technologies have made the prospect of fathering children a viable possibility in this subset of men, using a combination of sperm extraction techniques and intracystoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). In order to assess techniques for sperm retrieval, as well as reproductive outcomes, a systemic search of the MEDLINE database was conducted for all articles pertaining to management options for CBAVD, and also all reports describing outcomes of these procedures in the CBAVD population. Both epididymal and testicular sperm extraction (TESE) are viable options for men with CBAVD, and though rigorous data are lacking, live birth rates range from 8% to 50% in most small retrospective series and subset analyses. In addition, there does not appear to be significant differences in the rate of live birth or complications and miscarriages between the various techniques, though further investigation into other factors that limit reproductive potential of men with CFTR mutations and CBAVD is warranted.

The understanding of male factors of infertility has grown exponentially in the past ten years. While clear guidelines for obstructive azoospermia have been developed, management of non-obstructive azoospermia has lagged. Specifically, management of Kallmann Syndrome and central non-obstructive azoospermia has been limited by a lack of understanding of the molecular pathogenesis and investigational trials exploring the best option for management and fertility in these patients. This review aims to summarize our current understanding of the causes of central hypogonadotropic hypogonadism with a focus on genetic etiologies while also discussing options that endocrinologists and urologists can utilize to successfully treat this group of infertile men.

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the health status of men who have undergone vasectomy versus nonsterilized fertile men. METHODS:Using the National Survey for Family Growth from 2002 to 2017, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed on demographic and health data, including health status and health care utilization. RESULTS:Men who have undergone vasectomy are more likely to be older, healthier, have more children, identify as non-Hispanic white, be married, have a higher level of education, earn a higher mean household income, and were more likely to be privately insured than non-sterilized fertile men. On multivariate analysis, men who underwent vasectomy had a better health status despite being older. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:There are significant socioeconomic and health differences between men who elect vasectomy and non-sterilized fertile men. These differences should be considered when considering using sterilized men as a proxy for proven fertile men in epidemiological studies.

OBJECTIVE:To characterize the population of subfertile and infertile men in the United States who lack access to infertility services. DESIGN/METHODS:Analysis of the 2011-2013, 2013-2015, and 2015-2017 waves of the National Survey for Family Growth (NSFG) dataset. SETTING/METHODS:Not applicable. PATIENT(S)/METHODS:Noninstitutionalized civilian men, ages 15-45 years, who were married or lived with a woman and had not undergone a vasectomy. INTERVENTION/METHODS:Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)/METHODS:Access to infertility services. RESULT(S)/RESULTS:Compared with people who had used infertility services, unevaluated men who self-reported as infertile or subfertile were younger, had lower household incomes, were less educated, and were less likely to be married. Unevaluated infertile men were less likely to have a regular place where they received health care, were more likely to be uninsured, and had a poorer perception of their personal health. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, average household income, marital status, education level, and current insurance status remained significant. CONCLUSION(S)/CONCLUSIONS:Infertile men who had not used infertility services were less educated, were less likely to have been married, and had a lower household income and private insurance rate compared with men who had used infertility services. These demographic and health care utilization differences can help inform public policy related to fertility.

Purpose: To evaluate the technical success, clinical efficacy, and safety of gonadal vein embolization in men presenting with symptomatic varicoceles. Materials: A retrospective study of 83 consecutive male patients who had varicocele embolization between January 2008 and December 2018 was conducted. 39 patients (mean age, 33.8 years; range, 18-70 years) met the inclusion criteria of symptomatic varicocele (scrotal pain and/or heaviness) and had complete clinical records. The primary outcome was symptomatic improvement. Secondary outcomes were technical success rate defined as successful catheterization and embolization of the gonadal vein(s) and adverse events.
Result(s): Of the 39 patients, 33 (84.6%) presented had scrotal pain, 3 (7.7%) had heaviness, and 3 (7.7%) had pain and heaviness. Nine (23.1%) had prior varicocelectomy. 32 patients had complete preprocedural ultrasound; of those 12 (37.5%) had testicular asymmetry, 22 (68.8%) had left varicocele, 1 (3.1%) had right varicocele, and 9 (28.1%) had bilateral varicoceles. Procedural approach was transfemoral in 34 (87.2%) and transjugular in 5 (12.8%) patients. Only symptomatic sides were treated; of the 39 patients, 8 (20.5%) had bilateral, 1 (2.6%) had right, and 30 (76.9%) had left embolization. Embolic agents used were coils + Sodium tetradecyl sulfate (STS) in 3 (7.7%), coils + n-Butyl cyanoacrylate (n-BCA) glue in 8 (20.5%), n-BCA glue alone in 20 (51.3%), and a combination of different embolization material in the remainder of the patients (STS, vascular plugs, n-BCA, Gelfoam, and/or coils). The mean time to follow-up was 8.3 months. The overall technical success rate was 94.9%; of those, 28 (75.7%) indicated an improvement in their preprocedural symptoms. In patients with symptomatic improvement, the recurrence rate was 7.1%, with a mean time to recurrence of 7.5 months. There were no recorded complications. Conclusion(s): GVE is safe, has high technical success rate, and is effective in improving scrotal pain and heaviness