Sperm morphology from the actual inseminated sample does not predict clinical pregnancy following intrauterine insemination

Stanhiser, Jamie; Mersereau, Jennifer E.; Dock, Daquan; Boylan, C.F.; Caprell, Hunter; Coward, R. Matthew; Berger, David; Fritz, Marc A.

doi:10.1016/j.xfre.2020.11.007

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These transformations are not entirely uniform, leading to a notable proportion of spermatozoa exhibiting various morphological abnormalities [59]. Nevertheless, the role of sperm morphology as a predictor of reproductive success remains uncertain [60][61][62][63]. In our research, the SwimCount TM Harvester device demonstrated an increase in the proportion of morphologically normal spermatozoa.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Can Microfluidics Improve Sperm Quality? A Prospective Functional Study

Meseguer,

Giménez Rodríguez,

Rivera Egea

et al. 2024

Biomedicines

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The same sperm selection techniques in assisted reproduction clinics have remained largely unchanged despite their weaknesses. Recently, microfluidic devices have emerged as a novel methodology that facilitates the sperm selection process with promising results. A prospective case-control study was conducted in two phases: 100 samples were used to compare the microfluidic device with Density Gradient, and another 100 samples were used to compare the device with the Swim-up. In the initial phase, a significant enhancement in progressive motility, total progressive motile sperm count, vitality, morphology, and sperm DNA fragmentation were obtained for the microfluidic group compared to Density Gradient. Nevertheless, no statistically significant differences were observed in sperm concentration and chromatin structure stability. In the subsequent phase, the microfluidic group exhibited significant increases in sperm concentration, total progressive motile sperm count, and vitality compared to Swim-up. However, non-significant differences were seen for progressive motility, morphology, DNA structure stability, and DNA fragmentation. Similar trends were observed when results were stratified into quartiles. In conclusion, in a comparison of microfluidics with standard techniques, an improvement in sperm quality parameters was observed for the microfluidic group. However, this improvement was not significant for all parameters.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Can Microfluidics Improve Sperm Quality? A Prospective Functional Study

Meseguer,

Giménez Rodríguez,

Rivera Egea

et al. 2024

Biomedicines

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They reported that low morphology was only related to IVF success, not IUI [24]. Stanhiser et al found no differences in CPR following IUI among infertile couples with normal and abnormal sperm morphology, including severe teratospermia [29]. Similarly, Geraldo Orrego et al reported that isolated teratozoospermia was not a contraindication for IUI and there was no defined cutoff point for sperm morphology predicting pregnancy [30].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is There Any Effect of Change in Pre-Wash and Post-Wash Semen Parameters on the Success of Intrauterine Insemination?

Yavuzcan,

Yurtçu,

Keyif

et al. 2023

JPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(1) Background: We aimed to investigate the effect of change in pre-wash and post-wash semen parameters on intrauterine insemination (IUI) success in a homogenous study group. (2) Methods: IUI cycles conducted at an infertility clinic were included in this study. Patient records were examined retrospectively. Δ sperm count (per mL) was calculated as [pre-wash sperm count (per mL)–post-wash sperm count (per mL)]. Δ Total progressive motile sperm count (TPMSC) was also calculated as (post-wash TPMSC-pre-wash TPMSC). (3) Results: No statistically significant difference was detected in terms of Δ sperm count (p = 0.38), and Δ TPMSC (p = 0.76) regarding the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR). There was no statistically significant difference between CPR (+) and CPR (−) groups in terms of post-wash sperm count, TPMSC, TPMSC ≥ 10 × 10⁶, TPMSC ≥ 5 × 10⁶ (p = 0.65, p = 0.79, p = 0.49, p = 0.49, respectively). The live birth rate (LBR) showed no statistically significant differences except for a pre-wash TPMSC ≥ 10 × 10⁶ (p = 0.02). Through the performed ROC analysis, no statistically significant cutoff value could be set for the pre-wash TPMSC. (4) Conclusions: There is only a pre-wash TPMSC ≥ 10 × 10⁶ that showed a significant role in the success of IUI, even when considering all other pre-wash and post-wash semen parameters. Δ sperm count and Δ are not useful markers for IUI success.

show abstract

“…However, it is unclear what percentage of those with 0% normal morphology specifically had acrosome deficient morphology concerning for GZ. Related studies have demonstrated a lack of predictive ability and overall poor sensitivity of sperm morphology on rates of clinical pregnancy following intrauterine insemination (Lemmens, 2016; Ombelet et al, 2014; Stanhiser et al, 2020). A normal sperm morphology of >7% has been associated with nearly 70% sensitivity in predicting fertilization in ICSI, though it is possible that the established higher rates of sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) among morphologically abnormal sperm, itself found to be a strong predictor of ICSI outcomes, may be contributing to these results (Evgeni et al, 2014; Moubasher et al, 2021).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Awareness and reporting of globozoospermia among in vitro fertilization and andrology laboratories: A national survey

Ernandez

Kathrins

2022

Andrologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Globozoospermia (GZ) is a rare disorder found in less than 0.1% of infertile men in which spermatozoa lack acrosomes necessary for penetration of an oocyte. While methods have been demonstrated to allow globozoospermic men to achieve a viable pregnancy with their partner, the Wold Health Organization considers identifying and reporting GZ on semen analysis to be 'important'. Our study aims to determine if and to what extent in vitro fertilization (IVF) laboratories nationwide recognize and report GZ on semen analysis reports. We constructed an IRBapproved survey sent nationwide to IVF and andrology clinic laboratory directors listed by the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology and/or the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Results from the survey were de-identified for analysis. A total of 490 surveys were sent with a response rate of 10% (n = 51).Most respondents (66%) practiced in a private, rather than academic, setting. A majority of respondents were confident in their technicians' knowledge of GZ (86%) and ability to identify it on a sample (94%). However, only half of respondents noted a space to report the concern for GZ to the ordering physician, and 25% of respondents did not feel their clinic was able to identify patients where there is a concern for GZ. Similarly, 84% of respondents did not report a percent of acrosome-deficient sperm. Less than half of respondents reported that their clinic has previously diagnosed GZ. Though the majority of respondents felt that their laboratory technicians would be able to identify GZ, a significant minority felt that their clinic did not have means to be able to report concern for GZ. This may be due to the absence of a proper channel to report a concern for GZ, a lack of knowledge about the condition, or failure to distinguish GZ from a broader reported percentage of morphologically abnormal sperm. Given evidence that the diagnosis of GZ may be under-reported in the United States, there should be a national standard for laboratory technicians to be trained to recognize GZ and be able to report their suspicion to the ordering clinician.

show abstract

Sperm morphology from the actual inseminated sample does not predict clinical pregnancy following intrauterine insemination

Abstract: Objective: To determine the effect of sperm morphology from the specific sample used for intrauterine insemination (IUI) on clinical pregnancy rates (CPR).

Cited by 9 publications

References 15 publications

Can Microfluidics Improve Sperm Quality? A Prospective Functional Study

Can Microfluidics Improve Sperm Quality? A Prospective Functional Study

Is There Any Effect of Change in Pre-Wash and Post-Wash Semen Parameters on the Success of Intrauterine Insemination?

Awareness and reporting of globozoospermia among in vitro fertilization and andrology laboratories: A national survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About