Despite advances in the field of male reproductive health, idiopathic male infertility, in which a man has altered semen characteristics without an identifiable cause and there is no female factor infertility, remains a challenging condition to diagnose and manage. Increasing evidence suggests that oxidative stress (OS) plays an independent role in the etiology of male infertility, with 30% to 80% of infertile men having elevated seminal reactive oxygen species levels. OS can negatively affect fertility via a number of pathways, including interference with capacitation and possible damage to sperm membrane and DNA, which may impair the sperm's potential to fertilize an egg and develop into a healthy embryo. Adequate evaluation of male reproductive potential should therefore include an assessment of sperm OS. We propose the term Male Oxidative Stress Infertility, or MOSI, as a novel descriptor for infertile men with abnormal semen characteristics and OS, including many patients who were previously classified as having idiopathic male infertility. Oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) can be a useful clinical biomarker for the classification of MOSI, as it takes into account the levels of both oxidants and reductants (antioxidants). Current treatment protocols for OS, including the use of antioxidants, are not evidence-based and have the potential for complications and increased healthcare-related expenditures. Utilizing an easy, reproducible, and cost-effective test to measure ORP may provide a more targeted, reliable approach for administering antioxidant therapy while minimizing the risk of antioxidant overdose. With the increasing awareness and understanding of MOSI as a distinct male infertility diagnosis, future research endeavors can facilitate the development of evidence-based treatments that target its underlying cause.

Objective The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), remains an ongoing public health challenge. Although males are affected slightly more than females, the impact of SARS-COV-2 on male reproductive system remains unclear. This systematic review aims to provide a concise update on the effects of COVID-19 on male reproductive health, including the presence of viral RNA in semen, and the impact on semen quality, testicular histology, testicular pain and male reproductive hormones. The global health is fronting an immediate as well as impending threat from the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) causing coronavirus disease (COVID-19), that inflicts more males than females. Evidence suggest that male reproductive system is susceptible to this viral infection. However, there are still several pertinent queries that remain to be fully explained regarding the mechanism in testicular SARS-CoV-2 dynamics and the exact mode of its actions. Thus, the present systematic review aims to provide a concise update on the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on male reproduction.. Methods A systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines searching the PubMed database. Eligibility for inclusion were original human studies evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on male reproductive health. Specific outcomes required for inclusion were at least one of the following: i) seminal detection of mRNA virus, or evaluation of ii) semen analysis, iii) testicular histology or ultrasonography, iv) testicular clinical symptoms and/or v) male reproductive hormones in COVID-19-positive patients. Results Of 553 retrieved articles, 25 met the inclusion criteria. This included studies primarily investigating the presence of viral RNA in semen ( n = 12), semen quality ( n = 2), testicular histology ( n = 5), testicular pain ( n = 2) and male reproductive hormones ( n = 4). Results show little evidence for the presence of viral RNA in semen, although COVID-19 seems to affect seminal parameters, induce orchitis, and cause hypogonadism. Mortality cases suggest severe histological disruption of testicular architecture, probably due to a systemic and local reproductive tract inflammatory response and oxidative stress-induced damage. Conclusions Clinical evaluation of the male reproductive tract, seminal parameters and reproductive hormones is recommended in patients with current or a history of COVID-19, particularly in males undergoing fertility treatment. Any long-term negative impact on male reproduction remains unexplored and an important future consideration.

Background: Computer-aided sperm analyzers (CASA) are currently used worldwide for semen analysis.However, there are doubts about their reliability to fully substitute the human operator. Therefore, this study aimed to systematically review the current literature comparing results from semen evaluation by both CASA-based and manual approaches.Methods: A systematic screening of the literature was performed based on the PRISMA guidelines and by searching on PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases.Results: A total of 14 studies were included. Our results showed a high degree of correlation for sperm concentration and motility when analysis was performed either manually or by using a CASA system. However, CASA results showed increased variability in low (<15 million/mL) and high (>60 million/ mL) concentration specimens, while sperm motility assessment was inaccurate in samples with higher concentration or in the presence of non-sperm cells and debris. Morphology results showed the highest level of difference, due to the high amount of heterogeneity seen between the shapes of the spermatozoa either in one sample or across multiple samples from the same subject.Conclusions: Overall, our study suggests CASA systems as a valid alternative for the evaluation of semen parameters in clinical practice, especially for sperm concentration and motility. However, further technological improvements are required before these devices can one day completely replace the human operator. Artificial intelligence-based CASA devices promise to offer higher efficiency of the analysis and improve the reliability of results.

No abstract

Sperm vitality testing is a basic semen examination that has been described in the World Health Organization (WHO) Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen from its primary edition, 40 years ago. Several methods can be used to test sperm vitality, such as the eosin-nigrosin (E-N) stain or the hypoosmotic swelling (HOS) test. In the 6th (2021) edition of the WHO Laboratory Manual, sperm vitality assessment is mainly recommended if the total motility is less than 40%. Hence, a motile spermatozoon is considered alive, however, in certain conditions an immotile spermatozoon can also be alive. Therefore, the differentiation between asthenozoospermia (pathological decrease in sperm motility) and necrozoospermia (pathological decrease in sperm vitality) is important in directing further investigation and management of infertile patients. The causes leading to necrozoospermia are diverse and can either be local or general, testicular or extra-testicular. The andrological management of necrozoospermia depends on its etiology. However, there is no standardized treatment available presently and practice varies among clinicians. In this study, we report the results of a global survey to understand current practices regarding the physician order of sperm vitality tests as well as the management practices for necrozoospermia. Laboratory and clinical scenarios are presented to guide the reader in the management of necrozoospermia with the overall objective of establishing a benchmark ranging from the diagnosis of necrozoospermia by sperm vitality testing to its clinical management.