Use of high-magnification microscopy for the assessment of sperm recovered after two different sperm processing methods

Intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection outcomes: the role of sperm preparation techniques

“…The authors showed that both methods allow the selection of less vacuolated sperm cells and with less DNA fragmentation, however, the SUP recovered sperm with significantly lower vacuolization rate that the DGC technique [21].…”

“…So far, a single study has investigated the relationship between MSOME and sperm preparation techniques [21]. Monqaut et al [21] observed that both techniques were efficient in recovering lower percentage of sperm cells with vacuolization.…”

“…Human ejaculate is composed of a mix of spermatozoids, seminal liquid, epithelial cells, immature and necrotic sperm cells; red and white blood cells and bacteria [21]. Under in vivo conditions, spermatozoa are separated from these detrimental components in the female genital tract by migration through the cervical mucus [16].…”

“…One recent study found that the degree of vacuolization of sperm was lower after both gradient centrifugation and swim-up preparation compared with whole semen, suggesting that both methods allow the selection of less vacuolated sperm cells [21]. However, the results of IMSI were never compared between SUP cycles and DGC cycles.…”

Evaluation of ubiquitin and annexin V in sperm population selected based on density gradient centrifugation and zeta potential (DGC-Zeta)

“…Indeed, Avendaño et al shows that in infertile individuals up to 50% sperm with normal morphology may present DNA fragmentation [9]. Therefore, to overcome these in vitro shortcomings, novel sperm selection has been established based on ability to bind hyaluronic acid [10,11], surface charge [12,13], surface apoptotic markers [14] and nuclear normalcy [15].…”