ASRM 2024 Abstract Submission is Open!

Menu
Close Close Icon

Diagnosis and treatment of infertility in men: AUA/ASRM guideline part I (2021)


BACKGROUND

The overall goal of the male evaluation is to identify conditions that may affect management or health of the patient or their offspring. The specific goals of the evaluation of the infertile male are to identify the following:
  • potentially correctable conditions;
  • irreversible conditions that are amenable to assisted reproductive technologies (ART)using the sperm of the male partner;
  • irreversible conditions that are not amenable to the above, and for which donor insemination or adop- tion are possible options;
  • life- or health-threatening condi- tions that may underlie the infertility or associated medical comorbidities that require medical attention; and
  • genetic abnormalities or lifestyle and age factors that may affect the health of the male patient or of offspring particularly if ART are to be employed.
In this guideline, the term ‘‘male’’ or ‘‘men’’ is used to refer to biological or genetic men.

GUIDELINE STATEMENTS

Assessment

  1. For initial infertility evaluation, both male and female partners should undergo concurrent assess- ment. (Expert Opinion)
  2. Initial evaluation of the male for fertility should include a reproduc- tive history. (Clinical Principle) Initial evaluation of the male should also include one or more semen an- alyses (SAs). (Strong Recommenda- tion; Evidence Level: Grade B)
  3. Men with one or more abnormal semen parameters or presumed male infertility should be evaluated by a male reproductive expert for complete history and physical examination as well as other directed tests when indi- cated. (Expert Opinion)
  4. In couples with failed ART cycles or recurrent pregnancy losses (RPL) (two or more losses), evaluation of the male should be considered. (Expert Opinion)
Couple infertility may be due to male factors, female factors or a combination of male and female factors therefore parallel evaluation of both partners is always required. To interpret male infertility studies in isolation from female factors is not appropriate for these couples. Maternal age is the strongest predictor of fertility outcome for couples. A male in an infertile couple should have an initial SA and male reproductive history evaluation. The reproductive history assessment provides important information about functional sexual, lifestyle and medical history including medications that can contribute to reduced fertility or sterility. The SA is an important component in the initial clinical evaluation of the male and his reproductive health. Semen parameter values falling above or below the lower limit do not by themselves predict either fertility or infertility (1). In the interpretation of the SA, the clinician should remember that semen parameters are highly variable biological measures and may vary substantially from ejaculate to ejaculate. Therefore, at least two SAs, ideally obtained at least one month apart, are important to obtain, especially if the first SA has abnormal parameters. Evaluation and treatment of the male can improve SA and fertility outcomes allowing some couples to conceive naturally and potentially lower treatment costs. In addition to treatment benefits, 1-6% of men evaluated for infertility have significant undiagnosed medical pathology including malignancies even when they have so-called ‘‘normal’’ SAs (2, 3). Just as all infertile women are treated by those with specialized gynecologic training and expertise, all infertile men be evaluated by specialists in male reproduction (4).
 

Lifestyle Factors and Relationships Between Infertility and General Health

  1. Clinicians should counsel infertile men or men with abnormal semen parameters of the health risks associated with abnormal sperm production. (Moderate Recommen- dation; Evidence Level: Grade B)
  2. Infertile men with specific, identifiable causes of male infertility should be informed of relevant, associated health conditions (Moderate Recommendation; Evidence Level: Grade B)
  3. Clinicians should advise couples with advanced paternal age (R40) that there is an increased risk of adverse health outcomes for their offspring. (Expert Opinion)
  4. Clinicians may discuss risk factors (i.e., lifestyle, medica- tion usage, environmental exposures) associated with male infertility, and patients should be counseled that the current data on the majority of risk factors are limited. (Conditional Recommendation; Evidence Level: Grade C)
It is increasingly recognized that male reproductive and overall health are related with infertile subjects having more comorbidities compared to fertile controls (5). Men with abnormal semen parameters have higher rates of testicular cancer (6–9) and men with azoospermia have higher rates of cancer in general than fertile men (10). In addition, mortality rates have been positively associated with abnormal SAs (11).

Over 50% of the time, the cause of a man’s infertility can be attributed to one of several conditions many of which have health implications beyond fertility. It is important for the clinician to understand the various etiologies of male infer- tility and provide adequate counseling regarding associated conditions or consider referral to a specialist for the diagnosed conditions (Table 2). Data indicate that advanced paternal age increases de novo intra- and inter-genic germline mutations, sperm aneuploidy, structural chromosomal aberrations, sperm DNA fragmentation, birth defects, and genetically- mediated conditions (e.g., chondrodysplasia, schizophrenia, autism) in the offspring. Genetic counseling may be consid- ered for couples with advanced paternal age to discuss the low absolute risk (but high relative risk) of increased paternal age on at least certain genetic risks in their offspring, including de novo gene mutations as well as multiple medical conditions including schizophrenia and autism.

While a number of putative risk factors for male factor infertility (e.g., demographic, lifestyle, medical treatments, environmental exposures) have been studied, data are limited on the specific factors that actually affect male fertility. There is low-quality evidence for some association between diet and male infertility. Most of these studies have suggested that men with a diet lower in fats and meats (with more fruits and vegetables) is preferable to a higher-fat diet. Similarly, low-quality evidence (due to high risk of bias) exists to link smoking with a small impact on sperm concentration, motility, and morphology. Ongoing use of anabolic steroids suppresses spermatogenesis and interferes with fertility. It is recommended that if there is concern about the influence of a particular medication on fertility, clinicians may consult reviews on this subject or databases with data on reproductive effects of medications for additional information (12).

Diagnosis/Assessment/Evaluation

  1. The results from SA should be used to guide management of the patient. In general, results are of greatest clinical significance when multiple SA abnormalities are present. (Expert Opinion)
  2. Clinicians should obtain hormonal evaluation including follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and testosterone for infertile men with impaired libido, erectile dysfunction, oligozoospermia or azoospermia, atrophic testes, or evi- dence of hormonal abnormality on physical evaluation. (Expert Opinion)
  3. Azoospermic men should be clinically evaluated to differentiate genital tract obstruction from impaired sperm production initially based on semen volume, phys- ical exam, and FSH levels. (Expert Opinion)
  4. Karyotype and Y-chromosome microdeletion analysis should be recommended for men with primary infertility and azoospermia or severe oligozoospermia (<5 million sperm/mL) with elevated FSH or testicular atrophy or a presumed diagnosis of impaired sperm production as the cause of azoospermia. (Expert Opinion)

Figure 1


Fig1-diagnosis_and_treatment_of_infertility.png
  1. Clinicians should recommend Cystic Fibrosis Transmem- brane Conductance Regulator (CFTR) mutation carrier testing (including assessment of the 5T allele) in men with vasal agenesis or idiopathic obstructive azoo- spermia. (Expert Opinion)
  2. For men who harbor a CFTR mutation, genetic evaluation of the female partner should be recommended. (Expert Opinion) 
  3. Sperm DNA fragmentation analysis is not recom- mended in the initial evaluation of the infertile couple. (Moderate Recommendation; Evidence Level: Grade C)
  4. Men with increased round cells on SA (>1million/mL) should be evaluated further to differentiate white blood cells (pyospermia) from germ cells. (Expert Opinion)

Table 1


AUA Nomenclature Linking Statement Type to Level of Certainty, Magnitude of Benefit or Risk/Burden, and Body of Evidence Strength.
  Evidence Strength A (High Certainty) Evidence Strength B (Moderate Certainty) Evidence Strength C (Low Certainty)
Strong Recommendation (Net benefit or harm substantial) Benefits > Risks/Burdens (or vice versa) Net benefit (or net harm) is substantial

Applies to most patients in most circumstances and future research is unlikely to change confidence
Benefits > Risks/Burdens (or vice versa) Net benefit (or net harm) is substantial

Applies to most patients in most circumstances but better evidence could change confidence
Benefits > Risks/Burdens (or vice versa)

Net benefit (or net harm) appears substantial

Applies to most patients in most circumstances but better evidence is likely to change confidence (rarely used to support a Strong Recommendation)
Moderate Recommendation (Net benefit or harm moderate) Benefits > Risks/Burdens (or vice versa) Net benefit (or net harm) is moderate

Applies to most patients in most circumstances and future research is unlikely to change confidence
Benefits > Risks/Burdens (or vice versa)
Net benefit (or net harm) is moderate
Applies to most patients in most circumstances but
better evidence could change confidence
Benefits > Risks/Burdens (or vice versa)
Net benefit (or net harm) appears moderate
Applies to most patients in most circumstances but
better evidence is likely to change confidence
Conditional Recommendation (No apparent net benefit or harm) Benefits = Risks/Burdens

Best action depends on individual patient circumstances

Future research unlikely to change confidence
Benefits ¼ Risks/Burdens
Best action appears to depend on individual patient
circumstances
Better evidence could change confidence
Balance between Benefits & Risks/Burdens unclear
Alternative strategies may be equally reasonable
Better evidence likely to change confidence
Clinical Principle A statement about a component of clinical care that is widely agreed upon by urologists or other clinicians for which there may or may not be evidence in the
medical literature
Expert Opinion A statement, achieved by consensus of the Panel, that is based on members clinical training, experience, knowledge, and judgment for which there is no evidence
Schlegel. AUA/ASRM guideline part I. Fertil Steril 2020.
  1. Patients with pyospermia should be evaluated for the presence of infection. (Clinical Principle)
  2. Antisperm antibody (ASA) testing should not be done in the initial evaluation of male infertility. (Expert Opinion)
  3. For couples with RPL, men should be evaluated with kar- yotype (Expert Opinion) and sperm DNA fragmentation. (Moderate Recommendation; Evidence Level: Grade C)
  4. Diagnostic testicular biopsy should not routinely be per- formed to differentiate between obstructive azoospermia and non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA). (Expert Opinion)
SA and a male reproductive history should be obtained for all couples interested in fertility. Abnormalities in any one or more semen parameters can compromise a man’s abil- ity to naturally impregnate his female partner except in cases of azoospermia, some types of teratozoospermia (e.g., com- plete globozoospermia), necrozoospermia, or complete asthe- nozoospermia. With the exception of the aforementioned anomalies (which clearly cause infertility), none of the indi- vidual sperm parameters (e.g., concentration, morphology, motility) are highly predictive of fertility or diagnostic of infertility. The odds ratio for infertility increases as the num- ber of abnormal parameters increases (13). Clinicians manag- ing results from a SA should counsel patients that multiple significant abnormalities in semen parameters increase their RR for infertility. An endocrine evaluation of the infertile male with serum FSH and testosterone is not recommended as a primary first-line test in the evaluation of male infertility, but is indicated if oligospermia (<10 million sperm/mL) is present. Further evaluation of the male with luteinizing hor- mone is indicated for men with low serum testosterone (<300 ng/dL) as well as PRL evaluation for men with hypogonado- tropic hypogonadism or decreased libido.

Azoospermia is defined as the absence of sperm in the ejaculate, including the absence of sperm after examination of a centrifuged semen pellet. The history, physical examina- tion and hormonal studies can help differentiate obstructive azoospermia from NOA (Table 3). Men with azoospermia and small volume testes, elevated FSH and normal semen vol- ume will typically have NOA (azoospermia due to impaired sperm production). Men with normal testis volume (e.g., testis length >4.6 cm), FSH <7.6 and/or semen volume <0.5 or 1.0 mL most likely have obstructive azoospermia, especially if the proximal epididymis is enlarged on physical examination or the vasa deferentia are absent on exam.

Men with severe oligospermia (<5 M/mL) including NOA should be evaluated with a karyotype and Y microdeletion studies (14). The most common abnormal karyotypic pattern is Klinefelter syndrome (the presence of extra X chromo- somes). There may be rare foci of spermatogenesis found upon microdissection-testicular sperm extraction in at least 50%-60% of 47, XXY men. Y chromosome microdeletions are the second most common known genetic cause of infer- tility in the male. Although sperm may be found in the ejac- ulate of some men and through testicular sperm extraction in at least 50% of men with an AZFc deletion, sperm have not been retrieved by testicular sperm extraction in men with complete AZFa and/or AZFb microdeletions, so surgical inter- vention is not indicated.

Table 2


Summary of Evidence on Medical Comorbidities from Systematic Review.
Condition MULTIPLE studies indicate increased risk SINGLE study indicates increased risk Evidence is UNCLEAR or CONFLICTING
Klinefelter syndrome
  • Testosterone deficiency
  • All-cause mortality
  • Specific-cause mortality (perinatal disorders, congenital anomalies and genetic disorders, respiratory diseases, cardiovascular diseases, endocrine diseases, and malignant neoplasms)
  • Other specific-cause mortality (infections, nervous system diseases, digestive diseases, musculoskeletal diseases, trauma, other causes) 
  • Metabolic syndrome
Cystic fibrosis
  • Tooth enamel defects of permanent teeth
  • Pulmonary
  • Pancreatic
 
  • Dental caries
  • Plaque
  • Gingival bleeding
  • Dental calculus
Hypospadias    
  • Urinary anomalies
Cryptorchidism
  • Testicular cancer
   
Testosterone Deficiency
  • Diabetes
  • Metabolic syndrome
  • CVD
  • Hypertension
  • All-cause mortality
  • CVD mortality
  • CVD morbidity
  • Alzheimer’s disease
  • Peripheral artery disease
  • Intima-media thickness
  • Rapid bone loss
  • Lung cancer
  • Testicular cancer
  • Charlson Comorbidity Index
  • Periodontal disease
  • Ischemic heart disease
  • Prostate cancer
  • Colorectal cancer
Schlegel. AUA/ASRM guideline part I. Fertil Steril 2020.
Men with congenital obstructive azoospermia, including congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens (CBAVD) should have cystic fibrosis (CF) testing. Mutations in the CFTR gene are present in up to 80% of men with CBAVD, 20% of men with congenital unilateral absence of the vas def- erens (CUAVD) and 21% of men with idiopathic epididymal obstruction (15–17). As the goal of genetic testing is to help identify the etiology as well as provide counseling on potential offspring transmission, expanded carrier screening or gene sequencing including a test for the 5-thymidine (5T) allele of CCFTR should be considered. In cases where the male patient has a mutation in the CFTR gene and the partner is also a carrier, there is a risk of an affected offspring (25% if both partners are carriers, and up to 50% if the male has mutations in both alleles with a female partner who is a carrier). Thus, the female partner should also be screened for CFTR carrier status, as is routinely done in pre-conception counseling.

Sperm DNA fragmentation may adversely affect the outcome of ART treatments as well as attempts at natural fertility, including an increased miscarriage rate. Since there are no prospective studies that have directly evaluated the impact of DNA fragmentation testing on the clinical manage- ment of infertile couples (i.e., that the fertility outcomes of those who had testing are different from those who did not), this assay should not be routinely performed in the initial evaluation of the infertile male. However, sperm DNA frag- mentation may affect male fertility, and some causes of abnormal sperm DNA fragmentation (such as anti- depressant use or the presence of genitourinary infection) are easily reversible, whereas others may be managed by use of testicular sperm in selected cases.

Table 3


Hormonal assessment expected in azoospermic men with severely impaired spermatogenesis, obstruction, and hypogonadotropic hypogondadism.
  Severely Impaired Spermatogenesis  Obstructive Azoospermia Hypogonadotropic Hypogonadism
LH ↑ or Nl Nl
FSH Nl
Testosterone ↓ or Nl Nl
Schlegel. AUA/ASRM guideline part I. Fertil Steril 2020.
Increased levels of round cells in the semen may result from a spermatogenic problem where spermatocytes and/or round spermatids are present in the ejaculate or from the pres- ence of elevated levels of white blood cells in the semen (pyo- spermia). Special stains are required to differentiate germ cells and somatic cells. White blood cells in the semen may result from infection or inflammation in the proximal or distal male genital tract. Routine semen cultures have not been pro- spectively demonstrated to benefit infertile couples, so many male reproductive experts do not routinely screen for infec- tion unless pyospermia is present. ASA testing should only be considered if it will affect management of the patient, for example, to suggest the presence of reproductive tract obstruction.

The clinician should discuss the importance of paternal structural autosomal defects in the evaluation of the couple with RPL and the need for the male partner to have a karyo- type analysis. Given the increased risk of miscarriage for men with abnormal sperm DNA fragmentation, testing for sperm DNA fragmentation is also indicated for males in couples with RPL.

As noted above, differentiation of obstructive azoo- spermia from NOA may most frequently be predicted from clinical and laboratory results without the need for surgical diagnostic biopsy. In the rare cases where the man has normal semen volume, normal testicular volume and FSH % 7.6 without evidence of epididymal engorgement on exam, a testis biopsy may be done primarily for diagnostic purposes, sperm cryopreservation from the sample should be attempted if ART is an option.
 

Imaging

  1. Scrotal ultrasound should not be routinely performed in the initial evaluation of the infertile male. (Expert Opinion)
  2. Transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) should not be per- formed as part of the initial evaluation. Clinicians should recommend TRUS in men with SA suggestive of ejacula- tory duct obstruction (i.e., acidic, azoospermic, semen volume <1.5mL, with normal serum T, palpable vas deferens). (Expert Opinion)
  3. Clinicians should not routinely perform abdominal imag- ing for the sole indication of an isolated small or moder- ate right varicocele. (Expert Opinion)
  4. Clinicians should recommend renal ultrasonography for patients with vasal agenesis to evaluate for renal abnor- malities. (Expert Opinion)

The scrotum may sometimes be difficult to examine, for example in an obese patient or when the dartos muscle re- mains contracted even in a warm room during the physical exam. In these infrequent cases, color Doppler ultrasound may be used to examine spermatic cord veins. However, routine use of ultrasonography to identify sub-clinical (non-palpable) varicocele is discouraged, as treatment of these varicoceles is not helpful.

A commonly repeated clinical dictum without evidence has been to perform abdominal imaging for men with an iso- lated right varicocele. A more recent retrospective study of over 4,000 men with varicoceles (8% right), reported no dif- ference in cancer diagnoses in these men based on varicocele laterality (p¼0.313) despite the observation that over 30% of men with right varicoceles received abdominal computed to- mography scans compared with just 8.7% of men with left varicoceles and 11.2% of men with bilateral varicoceles (18). Thus, routine imaging based solely on the presence of a right varicocele is unnecessary. Clinical judgement suggests that abdominal imaging should be considered for men with a new onset or non-reducible varicocele, especially if the vari- cocele is large.

The clinician should be suspicious of distal male genital tract obstruction when the ejaculate volume is low (<1.5mL), with acidic semen (pH<7.0). For these men, TRUS evaluation should be considered to evaluate for anatomic ab- normalities. Mutations in the CFTR gene can lead to vasal and seminal vesicle agenesis/atresia. In men with CBAVD, TRUS 
does not contribute to the diagnosis or treatment, so it should not be done for evaluation of such infertile men.

In men with unilateral absence of the vas deferens, approximately 26-75% of men will have ipsilateral renal anomalies including agenesis (19, 20). In men with bilateral vasal agenesis, the prevalence is lower at 10% (21). As such, abdominal imaging should be offered to men with vasal agen- esis regardless of the CFTR status to allow for optimal patient counseling.

 

SUMMARY

Evaluation and management of men in a couple with infer- tility involves a step-wise process of evaluation and consulta- tion regarding treatment options. An increasing understanding of general health conditions associated with male infertility is valuable for counselling, as well as diag- nosis of the underlying cause of the fertility. Evaluation should proceed in parallel for both male and female members of a couple to optimize treatment success.

 

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

The causes of male infertility, including their genetic basis, have only been superficially explained at this time. The inter- actions of male infertility with other health conditions re- quires a deeper understanding as well. Sperm clearly affect stages of embryo development, implantation and mainte- nance of pregnancy via mechanisms that are incompletely defined at this time. However, use of ART allows unique insight into the interaction of sperm with egg and develop- ment of the resulting embryo. The potential to recover sper- matogenesis for men who have lost germ cells throughout the testis and are azoospermic will require novel interventions with stem cell technology, possibly coupled with additional techniques to support germ cell development. Since men with severely impaired spermatogenesis appear to often have underlying genetic defects responsible for their testicular dysfunction, understanding of the specific cause of spermatogenic dysfunction may be critical for successful interventions. Fortunately, progress continues to be made on each of these fronts.
 

DISCLAIMER

This document was written by the Male Infertility Guideline Panel of the American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc., which was created in 2017. The Practice Guidelines Committee (PGC) of the AUA selected the commit- tee chair. Panel members were selected by the chair. Member- ship of the Panel included specialists in urology and primary care with specific expertise on this disorder. The mission of the panel was to develop recommendations that are analysis based or consensus-based, depending on panel processes and available data, for optimal clinical practices in the treat- ment of early stage testicular cancer. Funding of the panel was provided by the AUA. Panel members received no remuneration for their work. Each member of the panel provides an ongoing conflict of interest disclosure to the AUA, and the Panel Chair, with the support of AUA Guidelines staff and the PGC, reviews all disclosures and addresses any potential conflicts per AUA’s Principles, Policies and Procedures for Managing Conflicts of Interest. While these guidelines do not necessarily establish the standard of care, AUA seeks to recommend and to encourage compliance by practitioners with current best practices related to the condition being treated. As medical knowledge expands and technology advances, the guidelines will change. Today these evidence- based guidelines statements represent not absolute mandates but provisional proposals for treatment under the specific conditions described in each document. For all these reasons, the guidelines do not pre-empt physician judgment in individual cases. Treating physicians must take into account variations in resources, and patient tolerances, needs, and preferences. Conformance with any clinical guideline does not guarantee a successful outcome. The guideline text may include information or recommendations about certain drug uses (‘off label‘) that are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), or about medications or substances not subject to the FDA approval process. AUA urges strict compliance with all government regulations and protocols for prescription and use of these substances. The physician is encouraged to carefully follow all available prescribing information about indications, contraindications, precautions and warnings. These guidelines and best practice statements are not intended to provide legal advice about use and misuse of these substances. Although guidelines are intended to encourage best practices and potentially encompass available technologies with sufficient data as of close of the literature review, they are necessarily time-limited. Guidelines cannot include evaluation of all data on emerging technologies or management, including those that are FDA- approved, which may immediately come to represent accepted clinical practices. For this reason, the AUA does not regard technologies or management which are too new to be addressed by this guideline as necessarily experimental or investigational.

 

DISCLOSURES

All panel members completed COI disclosures. Disclosures listed include both topic– and non-topic-related relationships.

Consultant/Advisor: Barbara Collura: WHO, COMMIT, EMD Serono, ACOG; Christopher De Jonge, PhD: WHO; Michael L. Eisenberg, MD: Sandstone Diagnostics, Roman, Dadi, Gilead, Underdog, Illumesense; Dolores J. Lamb, PhD: Celmatix; John P. Mulhall, MD: Vault; Craig S. Niederberger, MD: COMMIT; Peter N. Schlegel, MD: Theralogix, Inc, Roman Health

Scientific Study or Trial: Delores J. Lamb, PhD: NIH, American Board of Bioanalysts; Craig S. Niederberger, MD: Ferring Pharmaceuticals; Cigdem Tanrikut, MD: Ferring Pharmaceuticals

Leadership Position: Delores J. Lamb, PhD: American Board of Bioanalysts; John P. Mulhall, MD: Association of Peyronie's Disease Advocates (APDA), Sexual Medicine Soci- ety of North America, Journal of Sexual Medicine; Craig S. Niederberger, MD: ASRM, NexHand; Peter N. Schlegel, MD: ASRM

Investment Interest: Armand S. Zini, MD: YAD-Tech

Health Publishing: Cigdem Tanrikut, MD: Fertility Research and Practice, F&S Reviews

Other: Barbara Collura: RESOLVE: The National Infer- tility Association; Delores J. Lamb, PhD: WHO; Peter N. Schlegel, MD: RESOLVE; Cigdem Tanrikut, MD: New England Cryogenic Center, Swimmers

 

REFERENCES

  1. The optimal evaluation of the infertile male: Aua best practice state- ment, 2010. Practice committee of the american society for reproductive medicine. Diagnostic evaluation of the infertile male: A committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2012;98:294.
  2. Honig SC, Lipshultz LI, Jarow J. Significant medical pathology uncovered by a comprehensive male infertility evaluation. Fertil Steril 1994;62:1028.
  3. Kolettis PN, Sabanegh ES. Significant medical pathology discovered during a male infertility evaluation. J Urol 2001;166:178.
  4. Bach PV, Patel N, Najari BB, et al. Changes in practice patterns in male infertility cases in the united states: The trend toward subspecialization. Fertil Steril 2018;110:76.
  5. Salonia A, Matloob R, Gallina A, et al. Are infertile men less healthy than fertile men? Results of a prospective case-control survey. Eur Urol 2009; 56:1025.
  6. Negri L, Benaglia R, Fiamengo B, et al. Cancer risk in male factor-infertility. Placenta 2008;29(Suppl B):178.
  7. Hanson HA, Anderson RE, Aston KI, et al. Subfertility increases risk of testicular cancer: Evidence from population-based semen samples. Fertil Steril 2016;105:322.
  8. Mancini M, Carmignani L, Gazzano G, et al. High prevalence of testicular cancer in azoospermic men without spermatogenesis. Hum Reprod 2007; 22:1042.
  9. Raman JD, Nobert CF, Goldstein M. Increased incidence of testicular cancer in men presenting with infertility and abnormal semen analysis. J Urol 2005; 174:1819.
  10. Eisenberg ML, Betts P, Herder D, et al. Increased risk of cancer among azoospermic men. Fertil Steril 2013;100:681.
  11. Glazer CH, Bonde JP, Eisenberg ML, et al. Male infertility and risk of nonmalignant chronic diseases: A systematic review of the epidemiological evi- dence. Semin Reprod Med 2017;35:282.
  12. Welcome to reprotox. 2020. https://reprotox.org/08/28/2020.
  13. Guzick DS, Overstreet JW. Factor-Litvak P et al: Sperm morphology, motility, and concentration in fertile and infertile men. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1388.
  14. Behre HM, Bergmann M, Simoni M, et al. Primary testicular failure. [updated 2015 aug 30]. South Dartmouth, MA: MDText.com, Inc., 2000.
  15. Chillon M, Casals T, Mercier B, et al. Mutations in the cystic fibrosis gene in patients with congenital absence of the vas deferens. N Engl J Med 1995; 332:1475.
  16. Yu J, Chen Z, Ni Y, et al. Cftr mutations in men with congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens (cbavd): A systemic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod 2012;27:25.
  17. Mak V, Zielenski J, Tsui LC, et al. Proportion of cystic fibrosis gene mutations not detected by routine testing in men with obstructive azoospermia. Jama 1999;281:2217.
  18. Elmer DeWitt M, Greene DJ, Gill B, et al. Isolated right varicocele and incidence of associated cancer. Urology 2018;117:82.
  19. Kolettis PN, Sandlow JI. Clinical and genetic features of patients with congenital unilateral absence of the vas deferens. Urology 2002;60:1073.
  20. Schlegel PN, Shin D, Goldstein M. Urogenital anomalies in men with congenital absence of the vas deferens. J Urol 1996;155:1644.
  21. Weiske WH, Salzler N, Schroeder-Printzen I, et al. Clinical findings in congenital absence of the vasa deferentia. Andrologia 2000;32:13.

Practice Documents

ASRM Practice Documents have been developed to assist physicians with clinical decisions regarding the care of their patients.
Practice Committee Documents teaser

Tobacco or marijuana use and infertility: a committee opinion (2023)

In the United States, approximately 21% of adults report some form of tobacco use, although 18% report marijuana use.
Practice Committee Documents teaser

Prevention of moderate and severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: a guideline (2023)

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome is a serious complication associatedwith assisted reproductive technology.
Practice Committee Documents teaser

Definition of infertility: a committee opinion (2023)

‘‘Infertility’’ is a disease, condition, or status characterized by several factors.
Practice Committee Documents teaser

Clinical management of mosaic results from preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy of blastocysts: a committee opinion (2023)

This document incorporates studies about mosaic embryo transfer and provides evidence-based considerations for embryos with mosaic results on PGT-A.

More Resources

MAC 2021 teaser
ASRM Academy on the Go

ASRM MAC Tool 2021

The ASRM Müllerian Anomaly Classification 2021 (MAC2021) includes cervical and vaginal anomalies and standardize terminology within an interactive tool format.

View the MAC Tool
EMR Phrases teaser
Practice Guidance

EMR Shared Phrases/Template Library

This resource includes phrases shared by ASRM physician members to provide a template for individuals to create their own EMR phrases.

View the library
Practice Committee Documents teaser

ASRM Practice Documents

These guidelines have been developed by the ASRM Practice Committee to assist physicians with clinical decisions regarding the care of their patients.

View ASRM Practice Documents
Ethics Committee teaser

ASRM Ethics Opinions

Ethics Committee Reports are drafted by the members of the ASRM Ethics Committee on the tough ethical dilemmas of reproductive medicine.

View ASRM Ethics Opinions
Coding Corner general teaser
Practice Guidance

Coding Corner Q & A

The Coding Corner Q & A is a list of previously submitted and answered questions from ASRM members about coding. Answers are available to ASRM Members only.

View the Q & A
Covid-19 teaser
Practice Guidance

COVID-19 Resources

A compendium of ASRM resources concerning the Novel Corona virus (SARS-COV-2) and COVID-19.

View the resources
Couple looking at laptop for online patient education materials

Patient Resources

ReproductiveFacts.org provides a wide range of information related to reproductive health and infertility through patient education fact sheets, infographics, videos, and other resources.

View Website

Topic Resources

View more on the topic of male fertility and andrology
Document Icon

Tobacco or marijuana use and infertility: a committee opinion (2023)

In the United States, approximately 21% of adults report some form of tobacco use, although 18% report marijuana use. View Committee Opinion
Podcast Icon

Fertility and Sterility On Air - Microdose Interview: Dr. Ranjith Ramaswamy and Dr. Braian Ledesma

Listen to Dr. Ranjith Ramasamy and Dr. Braian Ledesma, who discuss the article "Fertility outcomes in men with prior history of anabolic steroid use." Listen to the Episode
News Icon

Resource Roundup: Male Reproductive Health

November is Men’s Health Awareness Month!  View the resource roundup!
Document Icon

Diagnostic evaluation of sexual dysfunction in the male partner in the setting of infertility: a committee opinion (2023)

It is the responsibility of the clinician to assess for erectile dysfunction, ejaculatory dysfunction, or diminished libido in men presenting for infertility. View the Committee Opinion
Coding Icon

Semen Analysis For Assessment of Fertility

What is the appropriate diagnostic code to use for a semen analysis for the assessment of infertility? View the Answer
Coding Icon

Post Vasectomy Infertility

If a husband has had a vasectomy, does the sterilization code apply to the wife's visits? View the Answer
Coding Icon

Testing With No History of Infertility

What diagnosis codes should  providers submit to insurance carriers while trying to evaluate fertility issues? View the Answer
Coding Icon

Male Consult

My group was wondering if and how to code for a male partner consultation.  View the Answer
Coding Icon

Lab RVUs

Is there a list of RVUs for embryology and andrology laboratory procedures, and if so, where can it be found? View the Answer
Coding Icon

Diagnostic Testing of an Infertile Couple

The Z31.41 is or is not the correct code to use for diagnostic testing of an infertile couple? And If so can if be used as the primary and only code? View the Answer
Coding Icon

Male Infertility

A summary of common codes for Male Infertility compiled by the ASRM Coding Committee View the Coding Summary
Videos Icon

Journal Club Global Live from PCRS - ICSI for Non-Male Factor Infertility

While intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) has revolutionized the treatment of male factor infertility, a significant controversy still remains regarding its ubiquitous use in all IVF cycles. View the Video
Document Icon

Optimizing natural fertility: a committee opinion (2022)

This committee opinion provides practitioners with suggestions for optimizing the likelihood of achieving pregnancy in couples... View the Committee Opinion
Document Icon

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) for non–male factor indications: a committee opinion (2020)

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection is frequently used in combination with assisted reproductive technologies. View the Committee Document
Document Icon

Diagnosis and Treatment of Infertility in Men: AUA/ ASRM Guideline Part II (2021)

The summary presented is Part II of the two-part series dedicated to the Diagnosis and Treatment of Infertility in Men: AUA/ASRM Guideline. View the Guideline
Document Icon

Guidance for Providers Caring for Women and Men Of Reproductive Age with Possible Zika Virus Exposure (Updated 2019)

This ASRM guidance specifically addresses Zika virus infection issues and concerns of individuals undergoing assisted reproductive technologies (ART). View the Guideline
Document Icon

Recommended practices for the management of embryology, andrology, and endocrinology laboratories: a committee opinion (2014)

A general overview for good management practices within the endocrinology, andrology, and embryology laboratories in the United States. View the Recommendation
Document Icon

Improving the Reporting of Clinical Trials of Infertility Treatments (IMPRINT): modifying the CONSORT statement (2014)

Clinical trials testing infertility treatments often do not report on the major outcomes of interest to patients and clinicians and the public. View the Guideline