Development and implementation of the AIDA International Registry for patients with Periodic Fever, Aphthous stomatitis, Pharyngitis, and cervical Adenitis syndrome

Objective: Aim of this paper is to illustrate the methodology, design, and development of the AutoInflammatory Disease Alliance (AIDA) International Registry dedicated to patients with the Periodic Fever, Aphthous stomatitis, Pharyngitis, and cervical Adenitis (PFAPA) syndrome. Methods: This is a physician-driven, non-population- and electronic-based registry proposed to gather real-world demographics, clinical, laboratory, instrumental and socioeconomic data from PFAPA patients. Data recruitment is realized through the on-line Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) tool. This registry is thought to collect standardized information for clinical research leading to solid real-life evidence. The international scope and the flexibility of the registry will facilitate the realization of cutting-edge study projects through the constant updating of variables and the possible merging and transfer of data between current and future PFAPA registries. Results: A total of 112 centers have already been involved from 23 countries and 4 continents starting from August 24th, 2021, to April 6th, 2022. In total 56/112 have already obtained the formal approval from their local Ethics Committees. The platform counts 321 users (113 principal investigators, 203 site investigators, two lead investigators, and three data managers). The registry collects retrospective and prospective data using 3,856 fields organized into 25 instruments, including PFAPA patient's demographics, medical histories, symptoms, triggers/risk factors, therapies, and impact on the healthcare systems. Conclusions: The development of the AIDA International Registry for PFAPA patients will enable the on-line collection of standardized data prompting real-life studies through the connection of worldwide groups of physicians and researchers. This project can be found on NCT 05200715

Global Practice Patterns in the Evaluation of Non-Obstructive Azoospermia: Results of a World-Wide Survey and Expert Recommendations

Purpose: Non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) represents the persistent absence of sperm in ejaculate without obstruction, stemming from diverse disease processes. This survey explores global practices in NOA diagnosis, comparing them with guidelines and offering expert recommendations. Materials and methods: A 56-item questionnaire survey on NOA diagnosis and management was conducted globally from July to September 2022. This paper focuses on part 1, evaluating NOA diagnosis. Data from 367 participants across 49 countries were analyzed descriptively, with a Delphi process used for expert recommendations. Results: Of 336 eligible responses, most participants were experienced attending physicians (70.93%). To diagnose azoospermia definitively, 81.7% requested two semen samples. Commonly ordered hormone tests included serum follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) (97.0%), total testosterone (92.9%), and luteinizing hormone (86.9%). Genetic testing was requested by 66.6%, with karyotype analysis (86.2%) and Y chromosome microdeletions (88.3%) prevalent. Diagnostic testicular biopsy, distinguishing obstructive azoospermia (OA) from NOA, was not performed by 45.1%, while 34.6% did it selectively. Differentiation relied on physical examination (76.1%), serum hormone profiles (69.6%), and semen tests (68.1%). Expectations of finding sperm surgically were higher in men with normal FSH, larger testes, and a history of sperm in ejaculate. Conclusions: This expert survey, encompassing 367 participants from 49 countries, unveils congruence with recommended guidelines in NOA diagnosis. However, noteworthy disparities in practices suggest a need for evidence-based, international consensus guidelines to standardize NOA evaluation, addressing existing gaps in professional recommendations

Global Practice Patterns and Variations in the Medical and Surgical Management of Non-Obstructive Azoospermia: Results of a World-Wide Survey, Guidelines and Expert Recommendations

Purpose: Non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) is a common, but complex problem, with multiple therapeutic options and a lack of clear guidelines. Hence, there is considerable controversy and marked variation in the management of NOA. This survey evaluates contemporary global practices related to medical and surgical management for patients with NOA. Materials and methods: A 56-question online survey covering various aspects of the evaluation and management of NOA was sent to specialists around the globe. This paper analyzes the results of the second half of the survey dealing with the management of NOA. Results have been compared to current guidelines, and expert recommendations have been provided using a Delphi process. Results: Participants from 49 countries submitted 336 valid responses. Hormonal therapy for 3 to 6 months was suggested before surgical sperm retrieval (SSR) by 29.6% and 23.6% of participants for normogonadotropic hypogonadism and hypergonadotropic hypogonadism respectively. The SSR rate was reported as 50.0% by 26.0% to 50.0% of participants. Interestingly, 46.0% reported successful SSR in <10% of men with Klinefelter syndrome and 41.3% routinely recommended preimplantation genetic testing. Varicocele repair prior to SSR is recommended by 57.7%. Half of the respondents (57.4%) reported using ultrasound to identify the most vascularized areas in the testis for SSR. One-third proceed directly to microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) in every case of NOA while others use a staged approach. After a failed conventional TESE, 23.8% wait for 3 months, while 33.1% wait for 6 months before proceeding to mTESE. The cut-off of follicle-stimulating hormone for positive SSR was reported to be 12-19 IU/mL by 22.5% of participants and 20-40 IU/mL by 27.8%, while 31.8% reported no upper limit. Conclusions: This is the largest survey to date on the real-world medical and surgical management of NOA by reproductive experts. It demonstrates a diverse practice pattern and highlights the need for evidence-based international consensus guidelines