P-079 Bilateral versus unilateral orchidopexy: IVF/ICSI-ET outcomes

Abstract

Abstract Study question Does unilateral and bilateral cryptorchidism infertility have an impact on IVF/ICSI-ET results? Summary answer Unilateral and bilateral orchidopexy do not affect the final live birth rate in IVF. What is known already A study was compared ICSI-ET outcomes between bilateral and unilateral cryptorchidism in NOA patients. Although 90.36% of their study population have undergone orchidopexy to improve their conditions at around 9 to 10 years old, the fertilization rates of bilateral and unilateral cryptorchidism group were only at 46.8% and 46.5% respectively, which were slightly below the average ICSI fertilization rate. The other study showed that patients of bilateral cryptorchidism had lower implantation rate. Apart from the mentioned study, no other study has attempted to evaluate the IVF/ICSI-ET outcomes in infertile men who had undergone orchidopexy. Study design, size, duration A retrospective cohort study at a tertiary hospital, including a total of 99 infertile men who underwent orchidopexy to treat cryptorchidism and subsequently underwent their first IVF/ICSI-ET cycle from January 2014 to January 2022. Participants/materials, setting, methods Men are divided into unilateral fixation group and bilateral fixation group based on the laterality of the cryptorchidism and testicular fixation surgery they have received. Choose fertilization rate and live birth rate as parameters for evaluating the results. Main results and the role of chance The sperm concentration and viability were significantly higher in unilateral orchidopexy group than in bilateral orchidopexy group (28.09 ± 27.99 vs 7.99 ± 14.68, P=0.001; 33.34 ± 22.52 vs 11.95 ± 17.85, P=0.001). Unilateral orchidopexy group showed lower demand for ICSI (66.07% vs 95.35%, P<0.001). Interestingly, both groups exhibited similar rates of fertilization, clinical pregnancy, live birth and birth defect. Boy birth ratio was lower in bilateral orchidopexy group as compared to unilateral orchidopexy group (27.27% vs 58.62%, P=0.026). Limitations, reasons for caution This study was limited in that the data source captured only patients from a single medical center, which could lead to selection bias, small sample size and limited external validity to the findings. Wider implications of the findings Our study suggested that blastocyst-stage ET is a good strategy for patients with history of orchidopexy. Trial registration number not applicable