Optimizing Clinical Evaluation of the Infertile Male: Current Guidelines, Gaps, and Future Directions

Authors

  • Dr Iyama Anslem Chester Department of Surgery (Urology Unit), Rivers State University, Port Harcourt, Rivers State

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51699/cajmns.v7i2.3166

Keywords:

Male Infertility, Semen Analysis, Azoospermia, Reproductive Genetics, Sperm DNA Fragmentation, Infertility Evaluation

Abstract

Male infertility contributes substantially to the global burden of infertility and is implicated in approximately half of infertile partnerships. Contemporary evaluation has expanded beyond conventional semen analysis to include endocrine, genetic, and targeted imaging assessments, reflecting a broader understanding of male reproductive dysfunction as both a fertility disorder and a potential marker of systemic disease. Still unable to identify specific diagnostic gaps, and make an overview of future directions which are likely to provide advances in precision diagnostics and clinical decision-making. Objective: To summarize and discuss contemporary recommendations among the American Urological Association and American Society for Reproductive Medicine, the European Association of Urology and the World Health Organization jointly, as well as the latest peer-reviewed research on epidemiology, genetics, sperm DNA integrity and advanced diagnostics as related to male infertility. Modem recommendations advocate an evaluated approach that includes thorough reproductive history, medical history and physical examination, a minimum of one well-executed semen analysis, directed endocrine assessment, judicious genetic investigation and imaging in narrowly defined clinical contexts. There are still large diagnostic gaps, particularly for men classified as either idiopathic infertility or severe spermatogenic failure. The present approaches for assessment are clinically valid but not comprehensive. Integration of validated molecular diagnostics, broader genomic testing in selected patients, and outcome-focused research may improve diagnostic yield and support more individualized management strategies.

References

World Health Organization, WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen, 6th ed. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2021.

R. E. Brannigan, L. Hermanson, J. Kaczmarek, S. K. Kim, E. Kirkby, and C. Tanrikut, “Updates to male infertility: AUA/ASRM guideline,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 212, no. 4, pp. 731–739, 2024.

A. Salonia, C. Bettocchi, L. Boeri, P. Capogrosso, J. Carvalho, G. Corona, et al., “European Association of Urology guidelines on male sexual and reproductive health: 2025 update on male infertility,” European Urology, 2025.

A. Agarwal, S. Baskaran, N. Parekh, C. L. Cho, R. Henkel, S. Vij, et al., “Male infertility,” The Lancet, vol. 397, no. 10271, pp. 319–333, 2021.

C. Krausz and A. Riera-Escamilla, “Genetics of male infertility,” Nature Reviews Urology, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 369–384, 2018.

H. Levine, N. Jorgensen, A. Martino-Andrade, J. Mendiola, D. Weksler-Derri, I. Mindlis, et al., “Temporal trends in sperm count: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis,” Human Reproduction Update, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 646–659, 2017.

R. Sharma, K. R. Biedenharn, J. M. Fedor, and A. Agarwal, “Lifestyle factors and reproductive health: Taking control of your fertility,” Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, vol. 11, p. 66, 2013.

M. L. Eisenberg, S. Li, M. R. Cullen, L. C. Baker, and L. I. Lipschultz, “Increased risk of cancer among azoospermic men,” Fertility and Sterility, vol. 100, no. 3, pp. 681–685, 2013.

C. L. R. Barratt, L. Bjorndahl, C. J. De Jonge, D. J. Lamb, F. O. Martini, R. McLachlan, et al., “The diagnosis of male infertility: An analysis of the evidence to support the development of global WHO guidance—Challenges and future research opportunities,” Human Reproduction Update, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 660–680, 2017.

F. Tüttelmann, C. Rückert, and A. Röpke, “Disorders of spermatogenesis: Perspectives for novel genetic diagnostics after 20 years of unchanged routine,” Medical Genetics, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 12–20, 2018.

M. S. Oud, L. Volozonoka, R. M. Smits, L. E. L. M. Vissers, L. Ramos, and J. A. Veltman, “A systematic review and standardized clinical validity assessment of male infertility genes,” Human Reproduction, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 932–941, 2019.

A. Zini and A. Agarwal, “Sperm DNA damage and male infertility: A narrative review,” Nature Reviews Urology, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 80–90, 2011.

A. Agarwal, A. Mulgund, A. Hamada, and M. R. Chyatte, “A unique view on male infertility around the globe,” Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 37, 2015.

S. D. Homa, T. V. Vessey, and M. A. Perez-Miranda, “Reactive oxygen species (ROS) in human semen: Determination of a reference range,” Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 757–764, 2015.

R. Sharma, A. Agarwal, A. Rohra, M. Assidi, A. Abu-Elmagd, and E. Turki, “Effects of increased paternal age on sperm quality, reproductive outcome and associated epigenetic risks to offspring,” Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, vol. 13, p. 35, 2015.

Downloads

Published

2026-03-17

How to Cite

Anslem Chester, D. I. (2026). Optimizing Clinical Evaluation of the Infertile Male: Current Guidelines, Gaps, and Future Directions. Central Asian Journal of Medical and Natural Science, 7(2), 402–406. https://doi.org/10.51699/cajmns.v7i2.3166

Issue

Section

Articles