scholarly journals Açıklanamayan İnfertil Çiftlerde Erkek Faktörü: Sperm DNA Fragmantasyonu Değerlendirmesi Male Factor in Uncompleted Infertile Pairs: Evaluation of Sperm DNA Fragmantation

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 109-113
Author(s):  
Hale BAYRAM ◽  
Mehmet CINCIK
Keyword(s):  
2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Y Cabell. Vives ◽  
P Belchin ◽  
C Lopez-Fernandez ◽  
M Fernandez-Rubio ◽  
J Guerrero-Sanchez ◽  
...  

Abstract Study question Is it useful to avoid sperm centrifugation in laboratory routine work to improve sperm quality and reproductive outcome in Assisted Reproduction Techniques (ART)? Summary answer Exclusion of sperm centrifugation for sperm selection using neat sperm samples (IO-lix), increases sperm quality in the collected subpopulation decreasing miscarriage rate after using ICSI. What is known already Inclusion of sperm centrifugation in ART is an aggressive intervention for sperm selection with ineludible production iatrogenic damage affecting sperm integrity. The application of IMSI, PICSI or microfluidic devices avoid sperm centrifugation and may improve the quality of the subsample obtained. However, these methodologies may result time consuming, expensive or producing poor results when the quality of the sperm is limited. We have already shown that a modified swim-up avoiding centrifugation (called IO-lix) is a low-cost and efficient alternative to microfluidic devices, recovers 100 times more concentration and reduces sperm DNA fragmentation with no significant differences to other methodologies. Study design, size, duration This is a retrospective study from 2018 to 2020 which includes patients with an average of age of 38.2 years using their own oocytes with ICSI as fertilization technique. Two aleatory groups of patients were made: Group 1: 88 cycles with 503 fertilized oocytes and 206 blastocysts were obtained with sperm samples processed by IO-lix and Group 2: 303 cycles, 1451 fertilized oocytes and 591 blastocysts using a standard “swim up” technique to process sperm. Participants/materials, setting, methods A total of 391 ICSI cycles were included in this retrospective study. The male factor was similar in both groups and they showed altered SDF previously to the cycle. We compared data of the motility and SDF of sperm samples before and after applying IO-lix and we analyzed by X2 contingence test differences on miscarriage rates between groups 1 and 2. Main results and the role of chance General sperm parameter changes after IO-lix showed that averaged sperm concentration observed in neat ejaculated samples was 62M/SD=46.4. Values obtained after IO-lix in the same samples were 12.3M/SD8.0. Averaged sperm motility in neat samples was 54%/SD=9.3 and 70.9%/SD=13.2 after IO-lix. Finally, sperm DNA fragmentation in neat samples was 35.8%/SD17.3, while these values decreased to 9.2%/SD=3.9 after IO-lix. About reproductive outcome results, significant differences were not obtained on the development to blastocyst stage rate comparing both groups (X2=0.003; p value = 0.954; Alpha 0.05). In the case of IO-lix processed samples, the pregnancy rate was 59.42% in Group 1 and 44.72% in Group 2 (X2=0.651; p value =0.419; Alpha 0.05). A total of 9 miscarriages of 41 clinical pregnancies (21.95%) were observed after IO-lix, while this number increases to 59 out of 123 clinical pregnancies, which means the 47.96% of the embryo transfers, when “swim-up” was used. In this case significant differences were obtained (X2=3.935; p value = 0.0.047; Alpha 0.05). Limitations, reasons for caution Being a pilot study aimed to understand the results of IO-lix in ART, correlations have not been stablished between the levels of sperm improvement after IO-lix and paired results of ART. This study would be necessary, specially to identify the possible origin of miscarriage associated to the male factor. Wider implications of the findings: Elimination of sperm centrifugation using a combined strategy of gradients and “swim-up” for sperm isolation, reduce miscarriage rate and produce equivalent results of blastocyst development to those obtained with “swim-up”. Being a cost-effective and improving laboratory workload, its use for sperm selection is recommended. Trial registration number Not applicable


KnE Medicine ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Binarwan Halim

<p><strong>Introduction</strong></p><p>Various etiologies of recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) have been extensively studied, but more than half of them still remain unknown. Male factor may play a role in incidence of idiopathic early recurrent pregnancy loss. Sperm DNA fragmentation as one of sperm test for male factor can be measured and expressed by a DNA Fragmentation Index (DFI). The aim of the study is to evaluate the association between sperm DNA fragmentation and the incidence of idiopathic early recurrent pregnancy loss.</p><p><strong>Material &amp; Methods</strong></p><p>A prospective study was done by recruiting 40 cases of  male couple from patients with a history of idiopathic early recurrent pregnancy loss and 40 cases of control from normal fertile population from May 2010 to September 2011 in Halim Fertility Center. Sperm DNA fragmentation was detected by halosperm kit.</p><p><strong>Results</strong><br />Both of groups were comparable in terms of the age of male patients, body mass index, duration of infertility, history of miscarriage and sperm parameters. Sperm DFI in the case group was 34.12%. and in the control group was 16.02%. There was significantly higher sperm DFI in the case group than in the control group. Sperm DFI &lt;30 was increased in control group (95%) compared with case group (40%). Sperm DFI ≥30 was increased in case group (60%) compared with control group (5%). There was a significant association between sperm DFI ≥30 and idiopathic early recurrent pregnancy loss (p&lt;0,05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion</strong></p><p>There is an association between higher sperm DNA fragmentation and incidence of idiopathic early recurrent pregnancy loss.</p>


2002 ◽  
Vol 78 ◽  
pp. S261-S262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramadan A Saleh ◽  
Ashok Agarwal ◽  
Essam A Nada ◽  
Mohamed H El-Tonsy ◽  
Donald P Evenson ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Treasa Joseph ◽  
Mariano Mascarenhas ◽  
Reka Karuppusami ◽  
Muthukumar Karthikeyan ◽  
Aleyamma T Kunjummen ◽  
...  

Abstract STUDY QUESTION Does oral antioxidant pretreatment for the male partner improve clinical pregnancy rate in couples undergoing ART for male factor subfertility? SUMMARY ANSWER There was no significant difference in clinical pregnancy rate following oral antioxidant pretreatment for male partner in couples undergoing ART for male factor subfertility compared to no pretreatment. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Damage to sperm mediated by reactive oxygen species (ROS) contributes significantly to male factor infertility. The ROS-related injury reduces fertilization potential and adversely affects the sperm DNA integrity. Antioxidants act as free radical scavengers to protect spermatozoa against ROS induced damage. During ART, use of sperms which have been exposed to ROS-mediated damage may affect the treatment outcome. Pretreatment with antioxidants may reduce the ROS-mediated sperm DNA damage. Currently, antioxidants are commonly prescribed to men who require ART for male factor subfertility but there is ambiguity regarding their role. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This was an open label, randomized controlled trial conducted at a tertiary level infertility clinic between February 2013 and October 2019. The trial included 200 subfertile couples who were undergoing ART treatment for male factor subfertility. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Couples were randomized into treatment arm (n = 100) and control arm (n = 100). In the treatment arm, the male partner received oral antioxidants (Vitamin C, Vitamin E and Zinc) for 3 months just prior to the ART cycle. In the control arm, no antioxidant was given to the male partner. The primary outcome was clinical pregnancy rate, while live birth rate (LBR), miscarriage rate and changes in semen parameters were the secondary outcomes. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Out of 200 women randomized, 135 underwent embryo transfer as per protocol. Following intention to treat analysis, no significant difference was noted in clinical pregnancy (36/100, 36% vs 26/100, 26%; odds ratio (OR) 1.60, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.93) and LBR (25/100, 25% vs 22/100, 22%; OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.27) between antioxidant and no pretreatment arms. The clinical pregnancy rate per embryo transfer was significantly higher following antioxidant pretreatment (35/64, 54.7% vs 26/71, 36.6%; OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.05 to 4.16) compared to no pretreatment. There was no significant difference in LBR per embryo transfer (25/64, 39.1%, vs 22/71, 31.0%; OR 1.43, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.91) after antioxidant pretreatment versus no pretreatment. The semen parameters of sperm concentration (median, interquartile range, IQR) (18.2, 8.6 to 37.5 vs 20.5, 8.0 to 52.5, million/ml; P = 0.97), motility (median, IQR) (34, 20 to 45 vs 31, 18 to 45%; P = 0.38) and morphology (mean ± SD) (2.0 ± 1.4 vs 2.2 ± 1.5%; P = 0.69) did not show any significant improvement after intake of antioxidant compared to no treatment, respectively. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION The objective assessment of sperm DNA damage was not carried out before and after the antioxidant pretreatment. Since the clinicians were aware of the group allotment, performance bias cannot be ruled out. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The current study did not show any significant difference in clinical pregnancy and LBR following antioxidant pretreatment for the male partner in couples undergoing ART for male subfertility. The findings need further validation in a larger placebo-controlled randomized trial. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This trial has been funded by Fluid Research grant of Christian Medical College, Vellore (internal funding). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER CTRI/2013/02/003431 TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE 26 February 2013 DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT 11 February 2013


2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Prashanth K. Adiga ◽  
Srisailesh Vitthala ◽  
Shivaranjeni

Abstract Background The routine semen analysis fails to detect sperm DNA damage which contributes to the majority of male factor infertility. Sperm DNA fragmentation test (DFI) measures the sperm DNA damage. Blastocyst formation is an important step in IVF ± ICSI. At present, the literature lacks any data that correlates DFI and blastocyst formation. Main body of the abstract We searched MEDLINE and other databases till 2020 for the studies that reported on sperm DNA damage and blastocyst formation in assisted reproductive technology (ART). The outcomes analyzed were (1) a comparison of blastulation rates in high DFI and low DFI groups. (2) Comparison of blastulation rates in high DFI and low DFI groups based on (a) different sperm DNA fragmentation assays (COMET, SCD, SCSA, TUNEL), (b) different types of ART (IVF/IVF + ICSI/ICSI). 10 studies were included in this review. A non-significant increase in the blastocyst formation was observed in high DFI group (OR = 0.70; 95% CI = 0.4 to 1.21; P = 0.20) and with SCD and TUNEL assays. Short conclusion Our study emphasizes on sperm DNA fragmentation (sperm DNA damage) as an important marker of blastocyst formation. The results of this meta-analysis suggest that the high sperm DNA fragmentation may not adversely affect the blastocyst formation.


2003 ◽  
Vol 79 ◽  
pp. 1597-1605 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramadan A Saleh ◽  
Ashok Agarwal ◽  
Essam A Nada ◽  
Mohamed H El-Tonsy ◽  
Rakesh K Sharma ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 112 (3) ◽  
pp. 483-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edson Borges ◽  
Bianca Ferrarini Zanetti ◽  
Amanda Souza Setti ◽  
Daniela Paes de Almeida Ferreira Braga ◽  
Rodrigo Rosa Provenza ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
C González-Ravina ◽  
A Pachec. Castro ◽  
M Cru. Palomino ◽  
A Requen. Miranda

Abstract Study question Does microfluidic sorting improve clinical outcomes over magnetic activated cell sorting (MACS) in ovum donation cycles? Summary answer Performing microfluidic sorting does not seem to improve clinical outcomes compared to MACS in ovum donation cycles. What is known already Novel sperm selection techniques, such as magnetic activated cell sorting (MACS), have been described as useful procedures to increase reproductive outcomes when male factor is present. Because of centrifugation steps associated to swim-up or density-gradient can induce sperm DNA fragmentation, microfluidic sperm sorters are being used to isolate motile human spermatozoa based on fluid dynamics and avoiding sample manipulation. This new technology has been shown to reduce the level of sperm DNA damage, especially double strand breaks, but an improvement of clinical outcome by using this technique remain unclear. Study design, size, duration Prospective and observational study to evaluate the efficacy of a sperm sorting technique based on microfluidic technology versus a technique based on the removal of apoptotic spermatozoa by MACS. The study was performed between May 2019 to January 2021 in IVI Madrid and IVI Sevilla. All men attending for an ovum donation cycle during the aforementioned study period were included. The exclusion criteria were sperm concentration &lt;5 mill/mL and &lt;15% of progressive motile spermatozoa. Participants/materials, setting, methods Seminal samples from couples participating in the study were divided into two aliquots; each of them was processed according to one of the study methods. Subsequently, each of the processed sperm samples was used to microinject half of the oocytes obtained during oocyte retrieval. In all case, a single-embryo transfer was performed. Variables were expressed as mean values and standard deviations. Statistical analysis was performed by ANOVA and Chi-squared where applicable; significance established under 0.05. Main results and the role of chance We included 48 couples in the study; of these, n = 31 transferred an embryo derived from a MACS processed sperm sample, while n = 17 received an embryo from the microfluidic one. Groups were homogeneous in terms of number of transferred embryos and frozen embryos, usable blastocyst rate and fertilization rate; results were as follows for MACS and microfluidic processing respectively: number of transferred embryos (1.0±0.0 vs. 1.0±0.0, p = 0.978); number of frozen embryos (1.6±0.5 vs. 1.4±0.7 p = 0.168); usable blastocyst rate (40.7% vs. 43.1%, p = 0.384); and fertilization rate (80.4% vs. 75.3%, p = 0.075). However, according clinical outcomes, we observed significant differences in implantation rate (74.2% vs. 58.8%, p &lt; 0.001) and in clinical pregnancy rate (74.2% vs. 58.8%, p &lt; 0.001); finally, the miscarriage rate was similar between the two groups of study (6.4% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.876). Limitations, reasons for caution This study has not considered the indication in male factor couples due to a high degree of double-strand DNA fragmentation. Therefore, more specific studies are required to determine in which patients, microfluidics sorter selection would significantly improve clinical outcomes. Wider implications of the findings: In an unselected population, magnetic activated cell sorting significantly improves clinical outcomes compared to a microfluidic technique, so this latter method should not be recommended without a male factor indication associated with sperm DNA damage. The proposed microfluidic technology does not seem to offer a flow-free approach to select spermatozoa. Trial registration number NCT04061486


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document