The gradient technique improves success rates in intrauterine insemination cycles of unexplained subfertile couples when compared to swim up technique; a prospective randomized study

New horizons in human sperm selection for assisted reproduction

Male infertility is a commonly encountered pathology that is estimated to be a contributory factor in approximately 50% of couples seeking recourse to assisted reproductive technologies. Upon clinical presentation, such males are commonly subjected to conventional diagnostic andrological practices that rely on descriptive criteria to define their fertility based on the number of morphologically normal, motile spermatozoa encountered within their ejaculate. Despite the virtual ubiquitous adoption of such diagnostic practices, they are not without their limitations and accordingly, there is now increasing awareness of the importance of assessing sperm quality in order to more accurately predict a male's fertility status. This realization raises the important question of which characteristics signify a high-quality, fertilization competent sperm cell. In this review, we reflect on recent advances in our mechanistic understanding of sperm biology and function, which are contributing to a growing armory of innovative approaches to diagnose and treat male infertility. In particular we review progress toward the implementation of precision medicine; the robust clinical adoption of which in the setting of fertility, currently lags well behind that of other fields of medicine. Despite this, research shows that the application of advanced technology platforms such as whole exome sequencing and proteomic analyses hold considerable promise in optimizing outcomes for the management of male infertility by uncovering and expanding our inventory of candidate infertility biomarkers, as well as those associated with recurrent pregnancy loss. Similarly, the development of advanced imaging technologies in tandem with machine learning artificial intelligence are poised to disrupt the fertility care paradigm by advancing our understanding of the molecular and biological causes of infertility to provide novel avenues for future diagnostics and treatments.

A comprehensive evaluation of pre- and post-processing sperm parameters for predicting successful pregnancy rate following intrauterine insemination with the husband's sperms

BACKGROUND

To determine the predictive values of sperm parameters pre- and post-processing by density gradient centrifugation for clinical pregnancy rates (CPRs) following artificial insemination by husband (AIH) in infertile Chinese couples.

METHODS

A total of 3,522 AIH cycles from 1,918 couples were retrospectively analyzed. The parameters were compared between the pregnant and non-pregnant groups and further between different etiological groups (Male-factor, Both-male-and-female-factor, and Other-factor). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to create models for predicting the CPRs of each etiological group.

RESULTS

The overall CPR was 13.3%. There were significant improvements for most sperm parameters after DGC. Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that, in overall AIH cases, the top parameters significantly influencing the CPR of AIH were pre-STR (OR = 1.037; P = 0.048) and post-VSL (OR = 1.036; P = 0.011). In the Male-factor Group, the top influencing parameters were pre-VCL (OR = 2.096; P = 0.008), pre-LIN (OR = 1.930; P = 0.002) and post-VSL (OR = 1.316; P = 0.023). In the Both-factor Group, the top influencing parameters were pre-VCL (OR = 1.451; P = 0.008) and post-motility (OR = 1.218; P = 0.049). In the Other-factor Group, the top influencing parameters were pre-VAP (OR = 1.715; P = 0.024), pre-STR (OR = 1.20; P = 0.011) and post-VSL (OR = 1.04; P = 0.017). Moreover, receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that the logistic regression models of the Male- and Both-factor Groups had greater powers for prognostic classification than those of other groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that some sperm parameters have a collinearity relationship in predicting the CPR following AIH. Moreover, the predictive capacity of a multivariate logistic regression model is better than those of individual parameters, especially for the Male- and Both-factor Groups. In these cases, pre-VCL is the common top influencing factor.

Outcome reporting across randomized controlled trials evaluating potential treatments for male infertility: a systematic review

STUDY QUESTION

What are the primary outcomes and outcome measures used in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating potential treatments for male infertility in the last 10 years?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Outcome reporting across male infertility trials is heterogeneous with numerous definitions and measures used to define similar outcomes.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

No core outcome set for male infertility trials has been developed. Male infertility trials are unique in that they have potentially three participants, a man, a female partner and their offspring and this will likely lead to significant variation in outcome reporting in randomized trials.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

A systematic review of RCTs mapping outcomes and outcome measures evaluating potential treatments for men with infertility registered in the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) between January 2010 and July 2021.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

Abstract screening and study selection was undertaken in duplicate using a review protocol that was developed prior to commencing the review. No risk of bias assessment was undertaken as this review aims to report on outcome reporting only.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

One hundred and seventy-five RCTs were identified, and given the large number of studies we limited our review to the 100 largest trials. Seventy-nine different treatments were reported across the 100 largest RCTs including vitamin and dietary supplements (18 trials), surgical treatments (18 trials) and sperm selection techniques (22 trials). When considering the largest 100 trials (range: 80-2772 participants), 36 primary and 89 secondary outcomes were reported. Forty-seven trials reported a primary outcome and 36 trials clearly defined their primary outcome. Pregnancy outcomes were inconsistently reported and included pregnancy rate (51 trials), pregnancy loss including miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, stillbirth (9 trials) and live birth (13 trials). Trials consistently reporting the same outcome frequently used different definitions. For example, semen quality was reported by 75 trials and was defined in 7 different ways, including; the World Health Organization (WHO) 2010 criteria (32 trials), WHO 1999 criteria (18 trials), WHO 1992 criteria (3 trials), WHO 1999 and 1992 criteria (1 trial) and the Kruger strict morphology criteria (1 trial).

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

We only evaluated the 100 largest trials published in the last 10 years and did not report outcomes on the remaining 75. An outcome was included as a primary outcome only if clearly stated in the manuscript and we did not contact authors to clarify this. As our review mapped outcomes and outcome measures, we did not undertake an integrity assessment of the trials included in our review.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Most randomized trials evaluating treatments for male infertility report different outcomes. Only half of the RCTs reported pregnancy rate and even fewer reported live birth; furthermore, the definitions of these outcomes varies across trials. Developing, disseminating and implementing a minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, for male infertility research could help to improve outcome selection, collection and reporting.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

A.P.-chairman of external scientific advisory committee of Cryos International Denmark ApS, member of the scientific advisory board for Cytoswim LDT and ExSeed Health. Guest lecture at the 'Insights for Fertility Conference', funded by MERK SERONO Limited. M.v.W.-holds a ZON-MW research grant. No external funding was obtained for this study.

Simulating nature in sperm selection for assisted reproduction

Sperm selection in the female reproductive tract (FRT) is sophisticated. Only about 1,000 sperm out of millions in an ejaculate reach the fallopian tube and thus have a chance of fertilizing an oocyte. In assisted reproduction techniques, sperm are usually selected using their density or motility, characteristics that do not reflect their fertilization competence and, therefore, might result in failure to fertilize the oocyte. Although sperm processing in in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intrauterine insemination (IUI) bypasses many of the selection processes in the FRT, selection by the cumulus mass and the zona pellucida remain intact. By contrast, the direct injection of a sperm into an oocyte in intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) bypasses all natural selection barriers and, therefore, increases the risk of transferring paternal defects such as fragmented DNA and genomic abnormalities in sperm to the resulting child. Research into surrogate markers of fertilization potential and into simulating the natural sperm selection processes has progressed. However, methods of sperm isolation - such as hyaluronic acid-based selection and microfluidic isolation based on sperm tactic responses - use only one or two parameters and are not comparable with the multistep sperm selection processes naturally occurring within the FRT. Fertilization-competent sperm require a panel of molecules, including zona pellucida-binding proteins and ion channel proteins, that enable them to progress through the FRT to achieve fertilization. The optimal artificial sperm selection method will, therefore, probably need to use a multiparameter tool that incorporates the molecular signature of sperm with high fertilization potential, and their responses to external cues, within a microfluidic system that can replicate the physiological processes of the FRT in vitro.

Differential impact of four sperm preparation techniques on sperm motility, morphology, DNA fragmentation, acrosome status, oxidative stress, and mitochondrial activity: A prospective study

BACKGROUND

Suboptimal human semen handling in vitro may induce sperm damage. However, the effects of semen swim-up, pellet swim-up, density gradient, and density gradient followed by SU on sperm motility, morphology, DNA fragmentation, acrosome reaction, intracellular reactive oxygen species, and mitochondrial activity were not fully understood.

OBJECTIVES

To study the impact of four sperm preparation techniques on sperm functional parameters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was conducted on 60 infertile men with a minimum sperm concentration of 20 × 10⁶ /ml and total sperm motility of ≥30%. Each raw semen sample was divided into four aliquots. Each aliquot was prepared by one of the tested techniques. Various sperm characteristics were assessed before and after sperm preparation.

RESULTS

Density gradient and density gradient followed by SU resulted in significantly higher DNA fragmentation percentages compared with semen swim-up (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively) and pellet swim-up (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Significantly higher percentages of spermatozoa with intact acrosome were detected in semen swim-up (p < 0.001) and pellet swim-up (p < 0.001) compared with raw semen. The percentage of reactive oxygen species-positive spermatozoa was significantly higher after pellet swim-up (p < 0.001), density gradient (p < 0.001), and density gradient followed by SU (p < 0.001) than raw semen. In addition, the percentages of 100% stained midpiece (active mitochondria) were significantly higher in semen swim-up (p < 0.001) and pellet swim-up (p < 0.001) compared with raw semen.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report comparing the impact of these techniques on various sperm functional parameters. Semen swim-up was more effective than density gradient in selecting better spermatozoa in terms of DNA integrity, reactive oxygen species levels, acrosome status, and mitochondrial activity. Randomized clinical trials comparing these four techniques are required to test their impact on embryo development and pregnancy outcomes.

Fluorescence-Based Ratiometric Analysis of Sperm Centrioles (FRAC) Finds Patient Age and Sperm Morphology Are Associated With Centriole Quality

A large proportion of infertility and miscarriage causes are unknown. One potential cause is a defective sperm centriole, a subcellular structure essential for sperm motility and embryonic development. Yet, the extent to which centriolar maladies contribute to male infertility is unknown due to the lack of a convenient way to assess centriole quality. We developed a robust, location-based, ratiometric assay to overcome this roadblock, the Fluorescence-based Ratiometric Assessment of Centrioles (FRAC). We performed a case series study with semen samples from 33 patients, separated using differential gradient centrifugation into higher-grade (pellet) and lower-grade (interface) sperm fractions. Using a reference population of higher-grade sperm from infertile men with morphologically standard sperm, we found that 79% of higher-grade sperm of infertile men with substandard sperm morphology have suboptimal centrioles (P = 0.0005). Moreover, tubulin labeling of the sperm distal centriole correlates negatively with age (P = 0.004, R = -0.66). These findings suggest that FRAC is a sensitive method and that patient age and sperm morphology are associated with centriole quality.

Relationship between sperm parameters and clinical outcomes of Intra Uterine Insemination (IUI)

Background:

Intrauterine insemination (IUI) is a widely utilized method for treating the infertile couples. The aim of the present study was to determine the pregnancy and abortion rates after IUI and to examine the relationship of sperm parameters with these rates.

Methods:

This retrospective study was performed on 911 infertile couples undergoing IUI treatment in Shahid Akbarabadi IVF Centre from May 2017 to May 2019. To evaluate the correlation of sperm parameters with the clinical pregnancy and abortion rates, odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was calculated.

Results:

In this study, the pregnancy rate following IUI was 15.7% (143/911), and among women who achieved pregnancy, the abortion rate was 42.0% (60/143). According to the multiple logistic regression analysis, none of the sperm parameters was associated with the pregnancy rate. Couples with either male or female factor infertility etiologies were more likely to get pregnant than those with unexplained infertility. Regarding the abortion rate, multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that normal sperm count was related to a lower abortion rate (adjusted OR=0.25, 95% CI=0.07–0.91).

Conclusion:

The present study did not reveal a significant relationship between none of the sperm parameters and pregnancy rate after IUI treatment. However, among women who got pregnant, continuation of the pregnancy was associated with the normal sperm count. Furthermore, analysis of all semen parameters together in comparison to one parameter alone might be more accurate to predict pregnancy or abortion. Further prospective cohort studies with a large number of couples are required.

Novel Techniques of Sperm Selection for Improving IVF and ICSI Outcomes

Almost 50% of the infertility cases are due to male factors. Assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) allow to overcome the incapacity of these patients' spermatozoa to fertilize the oocyte and produce a viable and healthy offspring, but the efficiency of the different techniques has still the potential to improve. According to the latest reports of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of the United States (CDC), the percentages of deliveries per ART cycle in 2014 and 2016 were 21 and 22%, respectively. Among the reasons for this relatively low efficiency, the quality of the spermatozoa has been pointed out as critical, and the presence of high percentages of DNA-damaged spermatozoa in patients' ejaculates is possibly one of the main factors reducing the ARTs outcomes. Thus, one of the main challenges in reproductive medicine is to ensure the highest quality of the spermatozoa used in ARTs, and specifically, in terms of genetic integrity. The latest techniques for the preparation and selection of human spermatozoa are herein discussed focusing on those proven to improve one or several of the following parameters: sperm genetic integrity, fertilization capacity, embryo production, and in vitro survival, as well as pregnancy and delivery rates following in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). In addition, we discuss the potential of techniques developed in non-human mammals that could be further transferred to the clinic.

Semen preparation techniques for intrauterine insemination

BACKGROUND

Semen preparation techniques for assisted reproduction, including intrauterine insemination (IUI), were developed to select the motile morphologically normal spermatozoa. The yield of many motile, morphologically normal spermatozoa might influence treatment choices and therefore outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of three different semen preparation techniques (gradient; swim-up; wash and centrifugation) on clinical outcomes (live birth rate; clinical pregnancy rate) in subfertile couples undergoing IUI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGFG) trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Direct Database, National Research Register, Biological Abstracts and clinical trial registries in March 2019, and checked references and contacted study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy in terms of clinical outcomes of semen preparation techniques used for subfertile couples undergoing IUI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary review outcomes are live birth rate and clinical pregnancy rate per couple.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven RCTS in the review; we included six of these, totalling 485 couples, in the meta-analysis. No trials reported the primary outcome of live birth. The evidence was of very low-quality. The main limitations were (unclear) risk of bias, signs of imprecision and inconsistency in results among studies and the small number of studies/participants included.Swim-up versus gradient technique Considering the quality of evidence, we are uncertain whether there was a difference between clinical pregnancy rates (CPR) for swim-up versus a gradient technique (odds ratio (OR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.35; I² = 71%; 4 RCTs, 370 participants; very low-quality evidence). The results suggest that if the chance of pregnancy after the use of a gradient technique is assumed to be 24%, the chance of pregnancy after using the swim-up technique is between 14% and 30%. We are uncertain whether there was a real difference between ongoing pregnancy rates per couple (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.82; heterogeneity not applicable; 1 RCT, 223 participants; very low-quality evidence). Considering the quality of evidence, we are uncertain whether there was a difference between multiple pregnancy rates (MPR) per couple comparing a swim-up versus gradient technique (MPR per couple 0% versus 0%; 1 RCT, 25 participants; very low-quality of evidence). Considering the quality of evidence, we are also uncertain whether there was a difference between miscarriage rates (MR) per couple comparing a swim-up versus gradient technique (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.59; I² = 44%; 3 RCTs, 330 participants; very low-quality evidence). No studies reported on ectopic pregnancy rate, fetal abnormalities or infection rate.Swim-up versus wash techniqueConsidering the quality of evidence, we are uncertain whether there is a difference in clinical pregnancy rates after a swim-up technique versus wash and centrifugation (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.13; I² = 55%; 2 RCTs, 78 participants; very low-quality evidence). The results suggest that if the chance of pregnancy after the use of a wash technique is assumed to be 38%, the chance of pregnancy after using the swim-up technique is between 9% and 41%. Considering the quality of evidence, we are uncertain whether there was a difference between multiple pregnancy rates between swim-up technique versus wash technique (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.02 to 13.28; heterogeneity not applicable; 1 RCT, 26 participants; very low-quality evidence). Miscarriage rate was only reported by one study: no miscarriages were reported in either treatment arm. No studies reported on ongoing pregnancy rate, ectopic pregnancy rate, fetal abnormalities or infection rate.Gradient versus wash techniqueConsidering the quality of evidence, we are uncertain whether there is a difference in clinical pregnancy rates after a gradient versus wash and centrifugation technique (OR 1.78, 95% CI 0.58 to 5.46; I² = 52%; 2 RCTs, 94 participants; very low-quality evidence). The results suggest that if the chance of pregnancy after the use of a wash technique is assumed to be 13%, the chance of pregnancy after using the gradient technique is between 8% and 46%. Considering the quality of evidence, we are uncertain whether there was a difference between multiple pregnancy rates per couple between the treatment groups (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.83; very low-quality evidence). Considering the quality of evidence, we are also uncertain whether there was a difference between miscarriage rates per couple between the treatment groups (OR 6.11, 95% CI 0.27 to 138.45; very low-quality evidence). No studies reported on ongoing pregnancy rate, ectopic pregnancy rate, fetal abnormalities or infection rate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to recommend any specific semen preparation technique: swim-up versus gradient versus wash and centrifugation technique. No studies reported on live birth rates. Considering the quality of evidence (very low), we are uncertain whether there is a difference in clinical pregnancy rates, ongoing pregnancy rates, multiple pregnancy rates or miscarriage rates per couple) between the three sperm preparation techniques. Further randomised trials are warranted that report live birth data.

IUI: review and systematic assessment of the evidence that supports global recommendations

BACKGROUND

IUI with or without ovarian stimulation (OS) has become a first-line treatment option for many infertile couples, worldwide. The appropriate treatment modality for couples and their clinical management through IUI or IUI/OS cycles must consider maternal and perinatal outcomes, most notably the clinical complication of higher-order multiple pregnancies associated with IUI-OS. With a current global emphasis to continue to decrease maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity, the World Health Organization (WHO) had established a multi-year project to review the evidence for the establishment of normative guidance for the implementation of IUI as a treatment to address fertility problems, and to consider its cost-effectiveness for lower resource settings.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

The objective of this review is to provide a review of the evidence of 13 prioritized questions that cover IUI with and without OS. We provide summary recommendations for the development of global, evidence-based guidelines based upon methodology established by the WHO.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using question-specific relevant search terms in May 2015. For each PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcomes) drafted by WHO, specific search terms were used to find the available evidence in MEDLINE (1950 to May 2015) and The Cochrane Library (until May 2015). After presentation to an expert panel, a further hand search of references in relevant reviews was performed up to January 2017. Articles that were found to be relevant were read and analysed by two investigators and critically appraised using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias, and AMSTAR in case of systematic reviews. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE system. An independent expert review process of our analysis was conducted in November 2016.

OUTCOMES

This review provides an assessment and synthesis of the evidence that covers 13 clinical questions including the indications for the use of IUI versus expectant management, the sperm parameters required, the best and optimal method of timing and number of inseminations per cycle, prevention strategies to decrease multiple gestational pregnancies, and the cost-effectiveness of IUI versus IVF. We provide an evidence-based formulation of 20 recommendations, as well as two best practice points that address the integration of methods for the prevention of infection in the IUI laboratory. The quality of the evidence ranges from very low to high, with evidence that may be decades old but of high quality, however, we further discuss where critical research gaps in the evidence remain.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

This review presents an evidence synthesis assessment and includes recommendations that will assist health care providers worldwide with their decision-making when considering IUI treatments, with or without OS, for their patients presenting with fertility problems.

Techniques used for IUI: is it time for a change?

STUDY QUESTION

Are the guidelines for the technical aspects of IUI (WHO, 2010) still in accordance with the current literature?

SUMMARY ANSWER

In general, the laboratory guidelines of the World Health Organization (WHO) are a suitable protocol, although the evidence is not always conclusive and some changes are advisable.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Lack of standardization of the technical procedures required for IUI might result in inter-laboratory variation in pregnancy rates. Most centers still use their own materials and methods even though some guidelines are available.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A structural review focusing on the association between pregnancy rates and the procedures of semen collection (e.g. ejaculatory abstinence, collection place), semen processing (e.g. preparation method, temperature during centrifugation/storage), insemination (e.g. timing of IUI, bed rest after IUI) and the equipment used.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

A literature search was performed in Medline and the Cochrane library. When no adequate studies of the impact of a parameter on pregnancy results were found, its association with sperm parameters was reviewed.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

For most variables, the literature review revealed a low level of evidence, a limited number of studies and/or an inadequate outcome measure. Moreover, the comparison of procedures (i.e. semen preparation technique, time interval between semen, collection, processing and IUI) revealed no consensus about their results. It was not possible to develop an evidence-based, optimal IUI treatment protocol.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The included studies exhibited a lack of standardization in inclusion criteria and methods used.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This review emphasizes the need for more knowledge about and standardization of assisted reproduction technologies. Our literature search indicates that some of the recommendations in the laboratory guidelines could be adapted to improve standardization, comfort, quality control and to cut costs.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The Dutch Foundation for Quality Assessment in Medical Laboratories (SKML), Nijmegen, The Netherlands. S.K. and W.N. have no conflicts of interest to disclose. C.B. and A.W. are members of the board of the SKML. With a grant from SKML, L.L. was paid for her time to perform the research and write the publication. D.B. received grants from Merck Serono, Ferring and MSD, outside the submitted work.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

The effect of swim-up and gradient sperm preparation techniques on deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) fragmentation in subfertile patients

PURPOSE

To compare the effect of two different sperm preparation techniques, including swim-up and gradient methods on sperm deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) fragmentation status of semen samples from unexplained and mild male factor subfertile patients undergoing intrauterine insemination (IUI).

DESIGN

A prospective randomized study was conducted in 65 subfertile patients, including 34 unexplained and 31 male factor infertility to compare basal and post-procedure DNA fragmentation rates in swim-up and gradient techniques. Sperm DNA fragmentation rates were evaluated by a sperm chromatin dispersion (SCD) test in two portions of each sample of semen that was prepared with either swim-up or gradient techniques. Sperm motility and morphology were also assessed based on WHO 2010 criteria.

RESULTS

Swim-up but not gradient method yielded a statistically significant reduction in the DNA fragmented sperm rate after preparation as compared to basal rates, in the semen samples of both unexplained (41.85 ± 22.04 vs. 28.58 ± 21.93, p < 0.001 for swim-up; and 41.85 ± 22.04 vs. 38.79 ± 22.30, p = 0.160 for gradient) and mild male factor (46.61 ± 19.38 vs. 30.32 ± 18.20, p < 0.001 for swim-up and 46.61 ± 19.38 vs. 44.03 ± 20.87, p = 0.470 for gradient) subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Swim-up method significantly reduces sperm DNA fragmentation rates and may have some prognostic value on intrauterine insemination in patients with decreased sperm DNA integrity.

Risk of pelvic inflammatory disease after intrauterine insemination: a systematic review

The aim of this study was to ascertain the incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) after intrauterine insemination (IUI). A systematic review was conducted using three different approaches: a search of IUI registries; a search of published meta-analyses; and a search of prospective randomized trials. Search terms were 'IUI', 'complications', 'infection' and 'PID'. Two IUI registers were identified that met the inclusion criteria, totalling 365,874 cycles, with 57 PID cases being reported. The post-IUI PID rate was 0.16/1000 (95% CI 0.2 to 0.3/1000). The frequency was higher in husband sperm cycles (0.21/1000) (28/135,839) than in donor sperm cycles (0.03/1000) (1/33,712) (P < 0.05; OR 6.95). Nineteen meta-analyses were retrieved, which included 156 trials, totalling 43,048 cycles, with no PID case being reported. Seventeen prospective clinical trials published between 2013 and 2014 were identified, totalling 4968 cycles; no PID case was reported. The reported rate of post-IUI clinical PID is low (0.16/1000), about 40% higher than reported in the general population of women during their reproductive life. No antibiotic prophylaxis should be recommended unless there is an associated risk factor.

The impact of semen processing on sperm parameters and pregnancy rates after intrauterine insemination

BACKGROUND

The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate the effect of semen processing on computer analyzed semen parameters and pregnancy rates after intrauterine insemination (IUI).

METHODS

Over a two-year period, a total of 981 couples undergoing 2231 IUI cycles were evaluated and the freshly collected non-donor semen was analyzed before and after density gradient centrifugation (DGC).

RESULTS

DGC led to significant increases in sperm concentration by 66±74 ×106/mL (P=0.0001), percentage of motile sperm by 24±22% (P=0.0001), concentration motile by 27±58 ×106/mL (P=0.0001), and forward sperm progression by 18±14 µ/s (P=0.0001). In 95% of cases, there was a decrease in the total motile sperm count (TMSC), with an average decrease of 50±124% compared to pre-processed samples (P=0.0001). Importantly, the decrease in TMSC did not negatively affect pregnancy rates (P=0.45).

CONCLUSIONS

This study proves that DGC leads to significant increases in most sperm parameters, with the exception of TMSC. Remarkably, the decrease in TMSC did not affect the pregnancy rate. This should reassure clinicians when the TMSC is negatively affected by processing.

Comparison of two sperm processing techniques for low complexity assisted fertilization: sperm washing followed by swim-up and discontinuous density gradient centrifugation

Objective

This study aimed to assess and compare sperm motility, concentration, and morphology recovery rates, before and after processing through sperm washing followed by swim-up or discontinuous density gradient centrifugation in normospermic individuals.

Methods

Fifty-eight semen samples were used in double intrauterine insemination procedures; 17 samples (group 1) were prepared with sperm washing followed by swim-up, and 41 (group 2) by discontinuous density gradient centrifugation. This prospective non-randomized study assessed seminal parameters before and after semen processing. A dependent t-test was used for the same technique to analyze seminal parameters before and after semen processing; an independent t-test was used to compare the results before and after processing for both techniques.

Results

The two techniques produced decreases in sample concentration (sperm washing followed by swim-up: P<0.000006; discontinuous density gradient centrifugation: P=0.008457) and increases in motility and normal morphology sperm rates after processing. The difference in sperm motility between the two techniques was not statistically significant. Sperm washing followed by swim-up had better morphology recovery rates than discontinuous density gradient centrifugation (P=0.0095); and the density gradient group had better concentration recovery rates than the swim-up group (P=0.0027).

Conclusion

The two methods successfully recovered the minimum sperm values needed to perform intrauterine insemination. Sperm washing followed by swim-up is indicated for semen with high sperm concentration and better morphology recovery rates. Discontinuous density gradient centrifugation produced improved concentration recovery rates.

Comparison of the effect of different media on the clinical outcomes of the density-gradient centrifugation/swim-up and swim-up methods

Objective

Sperm must be properly prepared in in vitro fertilization (IVF)-embryo transfer (ET) programs in order to control the fertilization rate and ensure that embryos are of high quality and have appropriate developmental abilities. The objective of this study was to determine the most optimal sperm preparation method for IVF.

Methods

Patients less than 40 years of age who participated in a fresh IVF-ET cycle from November 2012 to March 2013 were included in this study. Poor responders with less than three mature oocytes were excluded. Ham's F-10 medium or sperm-washing medium (SWM) was used in combination with the density-gradient centrifugation/swim-up (DGC-SUP) or SUP methods for sperm preparation. A total of 429 fresh IVF-ET cycles were grouped according to the media and methods used for sperm preparation and retrospectively analyzed (DGC-SUP/Ham's F-10, n=82; DGC-SUP/SWM, n=43; SUP/Ham's F-10, n=181; SUP/SWM, n=123).

Results

There were no significant differences among these four groups with respect to the mean age of the female partners, duration of infertility, number of previous IVF cycles, and retrieved oocytes. We determined that both the DGC-SUP and SUP methods for sperm preparation from whole semen, using either Ham's F-10 or SWM media, result in comparable clinical outcomes, including fertilization and pregnancy rates.

Conclusion

We suggest that both media and both methods for sperm preparation can be used for selecting high-quality sperm for assistive reproductive technology programs.