Significance of sperm characteristics in the evaluation of male infertility

Center for Advanced Research in Human Reproduction, Infertility and Sexual Function, Glickman Urological Institute, Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio 44195, USA.
Fertility and sterility (Impact Factor: 4.59). 04/2006; 85(3):629-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.08.024
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To compare sperm characteristics among: patients undergoing infertility evaluation, patients with male factor infertility (MFI), healthy sperm donors, and men with proven fertility; to examine the overlap of sperm characteristics in all four of these groups; and to identify good discriminators of fertility versus infertility among sperm characteristics.
Retrospective study.
Male infertility clinic at a tertiary care hospital.
Proven fertile men (n = 56), normal donors (n = 91), men presenting for infertility evaluation (n = 406), and MFI patients (n = 166).
Routine semen analysis.
Using current World Health Organization (WHO) reference values, a large group of MFI patients presented with higher sperm concentration (27.5 x 10(6) to 99.2 x 10(6)), resulting in broader overlap with fertile men and poor sensitivity (0.48). Similarly, percentage normal morphology (%) using Tygerberg's strict criteria was low in most of the MFI patients (sensitivity 0.83), almost half of the fertile men also presented with abnormal morphology (specificity 0.51). Of all the variables examined, sperm motility (%) was superior, having minimum overlap range (lower and upper cut-off values 46% and 75%) and high sensitivity (0.74) and specificity (0.90). Areas under curve were higher for motility (0.90) and concentration (0.84) compared with morphology (WHO 0.65 and Tygerberg's strict criteria 0.74).
Sperm motility and concentration provide more accurate information than morphology (WHO and Tygerberg's criteria) during infertility evaluation. Redefining the reference values for concentration and morphology may significantly increase the importance of routine semen analysis.

Download full-text


Available from: Nabil Aziz, Aug 23, 2015
  • Source
    • "Infertility is the inability to contribute conception after 12 months of unprotected intercourse; this may be due to male, female or some unexplained factors. Males alone contribute 35% to 40 % of infertile cases [1] [2] . "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective To elucidate the effect of age and sexual abstinence on semen quality (semen volume, total count, progressive motility, vitality and morphology). Methods A total of 730 semen samples were analyzed. Subjects were grouped according to the age (20-29, 30–34, 35–39 and 40–50) and abstinence (2–3, 4–5 and 6–7). Semen parameters were evaluated following WHO standard criteria. Results Analysis of 730 semen samples showed negative correlation of progressive motility (r=-0.131, P< 0.01), vitality (r=-0.173, P< 0.01), morphology (r=-0.324, P< 0.01) with age. With increase in age percentage of progressive motility, vitality and normal morphology in mean values declined after the age group of 35–39 to 40–50 years, but no change in volume and count were observed. Increase in abstinence with individual days significantly affected semen volume (H= 20.65, P< 0.001), count (H= 36.67, P<0.01), progressive motility (H= 13.53, P<0.05) and vitality (H= 15.33, P< 0.01). But, no effect was found on sperm morphology. Mann Whitney U test confirmed the changes in semen volume, total count and vitality in paired grouping from 2–7 days (P<0.05), but changes in sperm motility were observed after 5 days of abstinence in each paired group upto 7 days (P<0.05). Mean values of semen parameters among three abstinence groups (2–3, 4–5 and 6–7 days) also showed similar result. Conclusions In the present study, age negatively affected progressive motility, vitality and morphology of human sperm. Semen samples showed intra varied results within WHO amended abstinence period.
    06/2014; 3(2):134-141.. DOI:10.1016/S2305-0500(14)60017-8
  • Source
    • "They concluded that sperm morphology, motility and concentration reference values were a blunt instrument in assessing male reproductive potential. This was subsequently confirmed by reports that the WHO (1999) reference values were not clinically predictive (Nallella et al. 2006; Van der Steeg et al. 2011). Since a very small proportion of sperm get to the site of fertilisation in vivo (Williams et al. 1992), expectations that information about the wider ranging properties of a complete ejaculate is unrealistic. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Sperm DNA damage has been shown to be a valuable diagnostic and prognostic biomarker for male infertility and assisted reproductive treatment (ART) outcome. It is linked to every fertility checkpoint from reduced fertilization rates, lower embryo quality and pregnancy rates to higher rates of spontaneous miscarriage and childhood diseases. It is more robust than conventional semen parameters.The aim of this chapter is to provide an overview of current laboratory tests and relationships between sperm DNA damage and clinical outcomes. The conclusion is that sperm DNA damage is an important indicator of semen quality, and its routine use in the fertility clinic would improve ART success rates.
    Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology 01/2014; 791:103-16. DOI:10.1007/978-1-4614-7783-9_7 · 2.01 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Semen analysis is the basis of primary male investigation, and in certain cases, such as in severe oligozoospermia, semen parameters are of absolute importance and should be strongly considered in clinical management by implementing the World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) guidelines and recommendations [8]. However, the limited predictive value of semen analysis in achieving natural conception or in assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcome such as in in vitro fertilization (IVF) [9] [10] [11] [12] confirms the need for sperm function tests, as well as in cases of oligoasthenoteratozoospermia or idiopathic infertility when "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The limited predictive value of semen analysis in achieving natural conception or in IVF outcome confirms the need for sperm function tests to determine optimal management. We reviewed HZA and SPA predictive power in IVF outcome, with statistical significance of diagnostic power of the assays. HZA was readily efficient in predicting IVF outcome, while evident inconsistency among the studies analysed framed the SPA's role in male fertility evaluation. Considerable variation was noted in the diagnostic accuracy values of SPA with wide sensitivity (52-100%), specificity (0-100%), and PPV (18-100%) and NPV (0-100%) together with fluctuation and notable differentiation in methodology and cutoff values employed by each group. HZA methodology was overall consistent with minor variation in cutoff values and oocyte source, while data analysis reported strong correlation between HZA results with IVF outcome, high sensitivity (75-100%), good specificity (57-100%), and high PPV (79-100%) and NPV (68-100%). HZA correlated well with IVF outcome and demonstrated better sensitivity/specificity and positive/negative predictive power. Males with normal or slightly abnormal semen profiles could benefit by this intervention and could be evaluated prior to referral to assisted reproduction. HZA should be used in a sequential fashion with semen analysis and potentially other bioassays in an IVF setting.
    10/2013; 2013:945825. DOI:10.1155/2013/945825
Show more