Comparison of microfluid sperm sorting chip and density gradient methods for use in intrauterine insemination cycles

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effect of microfluiding sperm sorting chip and density gradient methods on ongoing pregnancy rates (PRs) of patients undergoing IUI. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Hospital IVF unit. Patient(s): Couples with infertility undergoing IUI cycles between 2017 and 2018. Intervention(s): Not applicable. Main Outcome Measure(s): Ongoing PRs. Result(s): A total of 265 patients were included in the study. Microfluid sperm sorting and density gradient were used to prepare sperm in 133 and 132 patients, respectively. Baseline spermiogram parameters, including volume, concentration, motility, and morphology, were similar between the two groups. Total motile sperm count was lower in the microfluiding sperm sorting group at baseline (35.96 AE 37.69 vs. 70.66 AE 61.65). After sperm preparation sperm motility was higher in the microfluid group (96.34 AE 7.29 vs. 84.42 AE 10.87). Pregnancy rates were 18.04% in the microfluid group and 15.15% in the density gradient group, and ongoing PRs were 15.03% and 9.09%, respectively. After using multivariable logistic regression and controling for confounding factors, there was a significant increase in ongoing PRs in the microfluid sperm sorting group. The adjusted odds ratio for ongoing pregnancy in the microfluid group compared with the density gradient group was 3.49 (95% confidence interval 1.12-10.89). Conclusion(s):The microfluid sperm sorting method significantly increased the ongoing PRs compared with the density gradient group in IUI cycles. (Fertil Steril Ò 2019;112:842-8. Ó2019 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.) El resumen está disponible en Español al final del artículo.

Sperm Selection and Embryo Development: A Comparison of the Density Gradient Centrifugation and Microfluidic Chip Sperm Preparation Methods in Patients with Astheno-Teratozoospermia

“…Mature sibling oocytes were subjected to ICSI with sperm selected from either preparation method and the subsequent embryo development was monitored. DGC yielded a significantly higher sperm concentration, while both progressive and total motility were found higher when the Fertile Ultimate ® microchip system was employed in accordance with related literature [ 36 , 37 , 38 ]. A higher sperm concentration, yet lower motility in the gradient group, indicates the presence of both motile and immotile spermatozoa in the sample after DGC.…”

Açıklanamayan İnfertilite Olgularında Uygulanan İntrauterin İnseminasyonlarda Sperm Hazırlama Yöntemlerinin Etkinliklerinin Geriye Dönük Karşılaştırılması

“…This difference was determined to be statistically significant. In conclusion the authors emphasized that the use of the microfluid method could significantly increase the ongoing pregnancy rate [15]. The results of our study can be considered to be of value as although there are other studies in literature with as high a number of cases, this is the first study to have compared the microfluid system with the two most frequently used sperm preparation methods.…”

Questioning the utility of round spermatid injections in men with non‐obstructive azoospermia

“…Many other round cells, such as diploid spermatocytes or spermatogonia, or even somatic cells, such as Sertoli cell nuclei or Leydig cells, resemble round spermatids in unstained specimens. The identification is mainly through morphological features, although other methods, such as flow cytometry 13 and microfluids for cell sorting, have also been developed and described 14,15 . A study by Hanson et al examined whether single nucleotide polymorphism analysis can confirm the expected haploid status of cells which are presumed to be round spermatids based on visual characteristics on cytology.…”

“…The identification is mainly through morphological features, although other methods, such as flow cytometry 13 and microfluids for cell sorting, have also been developed and described. 14 COVID-19 induces respiratory-predominant multiorgan dysfunction, including myocardial, renal, enteric and hepatic dysfunction, which coincides with the tissue expression of ACE2. 3 Meanwhile, several studies have shown that ACE2 is expressed in human testes (eg spermatogonia, Leydig cells and Sertoli cells), 4,5 suggesting that the testes may be another organ affected by COVID-19.…”

“…On the other hand, many viruses, such as mumps virus, HIV and HSV, 7,14 have been found to impair semen quality, and they may directly interact with spermatozoa or affect spermatogenesis by inducing local inflammation. [15][16][17] Previous studies found that SARS, 1 of the 3 epidemic coronaviruses to emerge in the past 20 years and that shows similar clinical presentations to COVID-19, 18 could cause orchitis 19 and focal testicular atrophy.…”