Many variables may influence success rates after intrauterine insemination (IUI), including sperm quality in the native and washed semen sample. A literature search was performed to investigate the threshold levels of sperm parameters above which IUI pregnancy outcome is significantly improved and/or the cut-off values reaching substantial discriminative performance in an IUI programme. A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library revealed a total of 983 papers. Only 55 studies (5.6%) fulfilled the inclusion criteria and these papers were analysed. Sperm parameters most frequently examined were: (i) inseminating motile count after washing: cut-off value between 0.8 and 5 million; (ii) sperm morphology using strict criteria: cut-off value ⩾5% normal morphology; (iii) total motile sperm count in the native sperm sample: cut-off value of 5-10 million; and (iv) total motility in the native sperm sample: threshold value of 30%. The results indicate a lack of prospective studies, a lack of standardization in semen testing methodology and a huge heterogeneity of patient groups and IUI treatment strategies. More prospective cohort trials and prospective randomized trials investigating the predictive value of semen parameters on IUI outcome are urgently needed. It is generally believed that intrauterine insemination (IUI) with homologous semen should be a first-choice treatment to more invasive and expensive techniques of assisted reproduction in cases of cervical, unexplained and moderate male factor subfertility. The rationale for the use of artificial insemination is to increase gamete density at the site of fertilization. Scientific validation of this strategy is difficult because literature is rather confusing and inconclusive. Many variables may influence success rates after IUI treatment procedures. It seems logical that sperm quality has to be one of the main determinants to predict IUI success. Clinical practice would benefit from the establishment of threshold levels for sperm parameters above which IUI pregnancy outcome is significantly improved and below which a successful outcome is unlikely. We performed a literature search to investigate if such threshold levels are known. Most striking were the lack of standardization in semen-testing methodology and the huge heterogeneity of patient groups and IUI treatment strategies. The four sperm parameters most frequently examined were: (i) inseminating motile count after washing: cut-off value between 0.8 and 5 million; (ii) sperm morphology using strict criteria: cut-off value >4% normal morphology; (iii) total motile sperm count in native sperm sample: cut-off value of 5-10 million; and (iv) total motility in native sperm sample: threshold value of 30%. This review identified an urgent need for more and better prospective cohort trials investigating the predictive value of semen parameters on IUI pregnancy rate.
The aim was to examine the value of different covariates in the prediction of intrauterine insemination (IUI) success. Between July 2011 and September 2015, data from 1401 IUI cycles with homologous semen in 556 couples were collected prospectively, by questionnaire, in a tertiary referral infertility centre. Statistical analysis was performed using generalized estimating equations (GEEs). GEEs were used instead of an ordinary logistic regression model to take into account the correlation between observations from the same person. The primary outcome parameter was clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), confirmed with a gestational sac and fetal heartbeat on ultrasonography at 7-8 weeks. An overall CPR of 9.5% per cycle was observed. Univariate statistical analysis revealed female and male age, male smoking, female body mass index, ovarian stimulation and inseminating motile count (IMC) as covariates significantly influencing CPR per cycle. Multivariate GEE analysis revealed that the only valuable prognostic covariates included female age, male smoking and infertility status (i.e. primary/secondary infertility). IMC showed a significant curvilinear relationship, with first an increase and then a decrease in pregnancy rate.
The wish to receive and donate information depends on the characteristics and beliefs of the candidate donors. Also, the donor's characteristics were linked to the acceptance of meeting the offspring in the future: the donors with a partner and donors who said they would donate without financial reimbursement were less willing to meet the donor offspring.
The extent to which certain parameters can influence pregnancy rates after intrauterine insemination with frozen donor semen was examined prospectively. Between July 2011 and September 2015, 402 women received 1264 IUI cycles with frozen donor semen in a tertiary referral infertility centre. A case report form was used to collect data prospectively. The primary outcome measure was clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), confirmed by detection of a gestational sac and fetal heartbeat using ultrasonography at 7-8 weeks of gestation. Statistical analysis was carried out using generalized estimating equations (GEE) to account for the correlation between observations from the same patient. Overall, CPR per cycle was 17.2%. Multivariate GEE analysis revealed the following parameters as predictive for a successful pregnancy outcome: female age (P = 0.0003), non-smoking or smoking fewer than 15 cigarettes a day (P = 0.0470 and P = 0.0235, respectively), secondary infertility (P = 0.0062), low progesterone levels at day zero of the cycle (P = 0.0164) and use of ovarian stimulation with HMG and recombinant FSH compared with clomiphene citrate and natural cycle (P = 0.0006 and P = 0.0004, respectively). These parameters were the most important factors influencing the success rate in a sperm donation programme.
.be (A Thijssen).Annelies Thijssen graduated in July 2012 with a Masters in biomedical sciences -clinical molecular sciences from the Transnational University Limburg, Diepenbeek, Belgium. She finished her master thesis on 'Methods for optimal sperm selection and preservation in the IVF laboratory' at the Genk Institute for Fertility Technology of the Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium. In September 2012, she started a PhD project 'Sperm banking in Belgium: medical, ethical and economical aspects', a collaboration between Hasselt University and the Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg with Willem Ombelet as promoter.Abstract This study investigated the effects of long-term (24 h) in-vitro sperm incubation at room temperature (RT; 23°C) versus testis temperature (35°C) on various sperm-quality parameters. Semen samples (n = 41) were prepared both by density-gradient centrifugation (DGC) and the swim-up technique in order to compare the influence of sperm preparation on sperm quality after incubation. Progressive motility and morphology were significantly higher after incubation at RT compared with 35°C( P < 0.001 and P < 0.01, respectively). The proportions of acrosome-reacted, apoptotic and dead spermatozoa were significantly lower in samples incubated for 24 h at RT compared with 35°C( P < 0.001, P = 0.01 and P < 0.001, respectively). The number of motile, morphologically normal, non-acrosome-reacted and nonapoptotic spermatozoa recovered after sperm preparation was significantly higher in DGC compared with swim-up samples (P < 0.001). However, spermatozoa prepared by swim-up showed better survival after incubation compared with DGC-prepared spermatozoa, especially when incubated at 35°C. In conclusion, this study indicates a significantly better and longer preservation of sperm quality when incubation is performed at RT. These findings may convince laboratories to change the routinely used sperm storage conditions in order to maximize the quality of the prepared sperm sample.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.