Predictive value of the sperm DNA fragmentation index for low or failed IVF fertilization in men with mild-to-moderate asthenozoospermia

Li, Tang; Rao, Meng; Yang, Wenjuan; Yao, Youlin; Luo, Qirui; Lü, Ling; Wang, Longda; Zhao, Shuhua

doi:10.1016/j.jogoh.2020.101868

Cited by 33 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding fertilization rates, Li et al showed lower fertilization rates after IVF with high SDF, but no difference in rates of fertilization with ICSI ( 55 ). A retrospective study demonstrated a significant negative correlation between DFI and fertilization rate after IVF ( 69 ). The most recent meta-analysis by Ribas-Maynou et al reported data on implantation rates being affected with elevated SDF after IVF but not significantly after ICSI ( 57 ).…”

Section: Effect Of Sdf On Fertility Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sperm DNA integrity and male infertility: a narrative review and guide for the reproductive physicians

Farkouh¹,

Salvio²,

Kuroda³

et al. 2022

Transl Androl Urol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objective: Conventional semen analysis (SA) remains an essential tool in the initial male fertility evaluation and subsequent follow-up. However, it neither provides information about the functional status of spermatozoa nor addresses disorders such as idiopathic or unexplained infertility (UI).Recently, assessment of sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) has been proposed as an extended sperm test that may help overcome these inherent limitations of basic SA. In this review, we aim to: (I) discuss the pathophysiological aspects of SDF, including natural repair mechanisms, causes, and impact on reproductive outcomes; (II) explain different assessment tools of SDF, and describe potential therapeutic options to manage infertile men with high SDF; and (III) analyse the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) of current research on the topic.Methods: This review was constructed from original studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses that were published over the years up until August 2021, related to the various aspects of SDF.

show abstract

Section: Effect Of Sdf On Fertility Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sperm DNA integrity and male infertility: a narrative review and guide for the reproductive physicians

Farkouh¹,

Salvio²,

Kuroda³

et al. 2022

Transl Androl Urol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The fertilization rate of ICSI was calculated as the number of oocytes with two pronuclei/number of all collected oocytes in the MII period*100 . TFF was defined as a cycle resulting in no fertilized oocytes, while LFR was defined as a cycle with a fertilization rate < 25% ( 18 , 19 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prediction of Fertilization Disorders in the In Vitro Fertilization/Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection: A Retrospective Study of 106,728 Treatment Cycles

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study aimed to develop a risk prediction of fertilization disorders during the in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI).MethodsA retrospective study was performed with 106,728 fresh embryo IVF/ICSI cycles from 2009 to 2019. Basic characteristics of patients, clinical treatment data, and laboratory parameters were involved. The associations between the selected variables and risks for low fertilization rate (LFR) and total fertilization failure (TFF) were investigated. Ordinal logistic regression and the receiver operating characteristic curves (ROCs) were used to construct and evaluate the prediction models.ResultsA total of 97,181 controls, 4,343 LFR and 5,204 TFF cases were involved in this study. The model based on clinical characteristics (the ages of the couples, women’s BMI, types of infertility, ART failure history, the diminished ovarian reserve, sperm quality, insemination method, and the number of oocytes retrieved) had an AUC of 0.743 for TFF. The laboratory model showed that primary infertility, ART failure history, minimal-stimulation cycle/natural cycle, numbers of oocyte retrieved < 5, IVF, and Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) level < 1.1ng/ml are predictors of TFF, with an AUC of 0.742.ConclusionWe established a clinical and a laboratory prediction model for LFR/TFF. Both of the models showed relatively high AUCs.

show abstract

“…After retrieval, oocytes were fertilized via conventional IVF or ICSI. The insemination, evaluation of the fertilization status, Day 3 embryo grading, and blastocyst scoring were performed as described in our previous study [ 36 ]. At most, three Day 3 embryos or two blastocysts were transferred.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cumulative live birth rates after IVF/ICSI cycles with sperm prepared by density gradient centrifugation vs. swim-up: a retrospective study using a propensity score-matching analysis

Rao

Wang

et al. 2022

Reprod Biol Endocrinol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Density gradient centrifugation (DGC) and swim-up (SU) are the two most widely used sperm preparation methods for in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). However, existing comparisons of IVF/ICSI outcomes following these sperm preparation methods are insufficient and controversial. Methods This retrospective study included all first autologous IVF and ICSI cycles performed between March 1, 2016, and December 31, 2020 in a single university-based center. A total of 3608 cycles were matched between DGC and SU using propensity score (PS) matching for potential confounding factors at a ratio of 1:1. The primary outcome was the cumulative live birth rate (cLBR) per aspiration. Results PS matching provided 719 cycles after DGC and 719 cycles after SU. After adjusting for confounders, the recovery rate, progressive motility rate after sperm preparation, fertilization rate, good-quality embryo rate, and blastocyst formation rate were similar between the DGC and SU groups. The cLBR (odds ratio [OR] = 1.143, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.893–1.461) and LBR per transfer (OR = 1.082, 95% CI: 0.896–1.307) were also not significantly different between the groups. Furthermore, no significant differences were found in all of the laboratory and clinical outcomes following conventional IVF or ICSI cycles between the two groups. However, a significantly higher fertilization rate (β = 0.074, 95% CI: 0.008–0.140) was observed when using poor-quality sperm in the DGC group than in the SU group. Conclusions Sperm preparation using DGC and SU separately resulted in similar IVF/ICSI outcomes. Further studies are warranted to compare the effects of these methods on IVF/ICSI outcomes when using sperm from subgroups of different quality.

show abstract

Predictive value of the sperm DNA fragmentation index for low or failed IVF fertilization in men with mild-to-moderate asthenozoospermia

Cited by 33 publications

References 52 publications

Sperm DNA integrity and male infertility: a narrative review and guide for the reproductive physicians

Sperm DNA integrity and male infertility: a narrative review and guide for the reproductive physicians

Prediction of Fertilization Disorders in the In Vitro Fertilization/Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection: A Retrospective Study of 106,728 Treatment Cycles

Cumulative live birth rates after IVF/ICSI cycles with sperm prepared by density gradient centrifugation vs. swim-up: a retrospective study using a propensity score-matching analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About