The acrosome index, radical buffer capacity and number of isolated progressively motile spermatozoa predict IVF results

The Sixth Edition of the WHO Manual for Human Semen Analysis: A Critical Review and SWOT Analysis

Semen analysis is the cornerstone of male fertility evaluation with WHO guidelines providing the basis for procedural standardization and reference values worldwide. The first WHO manual was published in 1980, and five editions have been subsequently released over the last four decades. The 6th Edition was published in July 2021. In this review, we identify the key changes of this 6th Edition. Additionally, we evaluate the utility of this 6th Edition in clinical practice using SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis. This new Edition has made the analysis of basic semen parameters more robust, taking into account the criticisms and grey areas of the previous editions. The tests assessing sperm DNA fragmentation and seminal oxidative stress are well-described. The main novelty is that this latest edition abandons the notion of reference thresholds, suggesting instead to replace them with “decision limits”. While this seems attractive, no decision limits are proposed for either basic semen parameters, or for extended or advanced parameters. This critical review of the 6th Edition of the WHO laboratory manual combined with a SWOT analysis summarizes the changes and novelties present in this new Edition and provides an in-depth analysis that could help its global use in the coming years.

Clinical significance of the low normal sperm morphology value as proposed in the fifth edition of the WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen

The very low cut-off value for sperm morphology of 4% morphologically normal spermatozoa, as proposed in the new edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) manual on semen analysis, is in agreement with recently published values and reflects the trend of a decline in reported mean values for normal sperm morphology. The reduced value for morphologically normal spermatozoa over the years may be due to several factors. The first is the introduction of strict criteria for the evaluation of sperm morphology. Other reasons may include the introduction of additional criteria for sperm morphology abnormalities and the suggested decrease in semen parameters because of increasing negative environmental influences. Although on its own the newly proposed very low normal value may not provide the strong predictive value for a males' fertility potential, as originally reported for sperm morphology evaluated according to strict criteria, a good predictive value can still be obtained if the holistic, strict approach for sperm morphology evaluation is followed together with additional sperm morphology parameters now available, because certain morphology patterns and sperm abnormalities are now known to be of strong prognostic value. In addition, better international standardization of the technical methodology, consensus on the interpretation of sperm morphology evaluation criteria and standardized international external quality control (EQC) schemes, are of utmost importance to maintain the good predictive value of sperm morphology.

Correlation of post swim-up acrosome index with in-vitro fertilization outcomes

PURPOSE

A prospective study was planned to determine the relationship between post swim-up acrosome index (AI) evaluation and fertilization outcomes in an in vitro fertilization (IVF) program.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Infertile couples who have applied to IVF were admitted into this study when the male partner's sperm concentration was > 20 x 10(6)/mL and motility > 30%. Pre- and post swim-up semen quality parameters including concentration, motility, sperm morphology and AI were evaluated in a prospective, randomized and blinded fashion. The couples were divided prospectively into 2 groups. In group I (25 couples) 50 000 sperm per oocyte were used for insemination considering post swim-up acrosome index, and in group II (25 couples) 50 000 sperm per oocyte were used for insemination without considering post swim-up acrosome index.

RESULTS

Pre- and post swim-up AI were 30.8 +/- 3.4 and 17.8 +/- 4.5 in group I, and 31.4 +/- 3.6 and 16.3 +/- 4.7 in group II (p > 0.05) respectively. The significant improvement in morphology and motility after double wash swim-up procedure has been observed. However, double wash swim-up procedure could not eliminate head and especially acrosomal defects which would directly effect fertilization capacity in conventional IVF program. In group I, 85.3% of oocytes were fertilized, with a 48% pregnancy rate; in group II, 71.0% of oocytes were fertilized, with a pregnancy rate of 20%. Fertilization and pregnancy rates were significantly different (p < 0.05) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

We have concluded that it could be useful to consider post swim-up AI of sperm inseminated in conventional IVF cycles, which correlates with high fertilization and pregnancy rates.

Prediction of outcomes of assisted reproduction treatment using the calcium ionophore-induced acrosome reaction

BACKGROUND

Sperm concentration and motility are poor predictors of the outcome of intrauterine insemination (IUI), hysteroscopic intratubal insemination (HIT), or complete fertilization failure (CFF) in conventional IVF. We investigated whether the calcium ionophore-induced acrosome reaction (AR) constitutes an additional indicator of CFF and pregnancy that is independent of these semen parameters.

METHODS

Infertile couples with no female factor (n=388) and women with tubal obstruction (n=32) were studied: IVF (n=133), ICSI (n=72), HIT (n=245) and IUI (n=61). The percentage of acrosome-reacted sperm in relation to viable sperm was calculated. Receiver operating characteristic curve and multiple logistic regression analyses were used to determine threshold values and the best predictor for CFF and pregnancy.

RESULTS

Threshold values of AR for predicting CFF in IVF and pregnancy in IVF and HIT + IUI were 21, 26 and 22% respectively. These values were independent of the conventional semen analysis parameters. CFF was lower (2 versus 20%; P<0.01) and the pregnancy rate was higher (46 versus 24% P<0.05) for those with AR >21% in IVF. CFF and pregnancy rate in ICSI did not differ according to AR. Pregnancy rate was higher for those with an AR >22% for HIT + IUI (23 versus 11% P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Ionophore-induced AR appears to be a useful indicator in addition to routine semen analysis for selection of patients for treatment with appropriate assisted reproduction procedure.