A copy of this work was available on the public web and has been preserved in the Wayback Machine. The capture dates from 2019; you can also visit the original URL.
The file type is
This paper reports on a patient in whom the clinical diagnosis of obstructive azoospermia was made according to clinical observations, i.e. azoospermia, normal andrological examination, normal follicle stimulating hormone and a misleading histopathological report of a testicular biopsy. Microsurgical vasoepididymostomy failed to restore fertility, and as a last resort, microsurgical sperm aspiration was performed. Although flagellated cells were observed in the epididymal aspiration, nodoi:10.1093/humrep/12.10.2217 pmid:9402284 fatcat:z2nqvhgtjbarrbp3pt5baozwju