Microfluidics: The future of sperm selection in assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND

Obtaining functional sperm cells is the first step to treat infertility. With the ever-increasing trend in male infertility, clinicians require access to effective solutions that are able to single out the most viable spermatozoa, which would max out the chance for a successful pregnancy. The new generation techniques for sperm selection involve microfluidics, which offers laminar flow and low Reynolds number within the platforms can provide unprecedented opportunities for sperm selection. Previous studies showed that microfluidic platforms can provide a novel approach to this challenge and since then researchers across the globe have attacked this problem from multiple angles.

OBJECTIVE

In this review, we seek to provide a much-needed bridge between the technical and medical aspects of microfluidic sperm selection. Here, we provide an up-to-date list on microfluidic sperm selection procedures and its application in assisted reproductive technology laboratories.

SEARCH METHOD

A literature search was performed in Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus to select papers reporting microfluidic sperm selection using the keywords: microfluidic sperm selection, self-motility, non-motile sperm selection, boundary following, rheotaxis, chemotaxis, and thermotaxis. Papers published before March 31, 2023 were selected.

OUTCOMES

Our results show that most studies have used motility-based properties for sperm selection. However, microfluidic platforms are ripe for making use of other properties such as chemotaxis and especially rheotaxis. We have identified that low throughput is one of the major hurdles to current microfluidic sperm selection chips, which can be solved via parallelization.

CONCLUSION

Future work needs to be performed on numerical simulation of the microfluidics chip prior to fabrication as well as relevant clinical assessment after the selection procedure. This would require a close collaboration and understanding among engineers, biologists, and medical professionals. It is interesting that in spite of two decades of microfluidics sperm selection, numerical simulation and clinical studies are lagging behind. It is expected that microfluidic sperm selection platforms will play a major role in the development of fully integrated start-to-finish assisted reproductive technology systems.

Optimized sperm selection: a highly efficient device for the isolation of progressive motile sperm with low DNA fragmentation index

PURPOSE

To identify the sperm preparation procedure that selects the best sperm population for medically assisted reproduction.

METHODS

Prospective observational study comparing the effect of four different sperm selection procedures on various semen parameters. Unused raw semen after routine diagnostic analysis was split in four fractions and processed by four different methods: (1) density gradient centrifugation (DGC), (2) sperm wash (SW), (3) DGC followed by magnetic activated cell sorting (MACS), and (4) using a sperm separation device (SSD). Each fraction was analyzed for progressive motility, morphology, acrosome index (AI), and DNA fragmentation index (DFI).

RESULTS

With DGC as standard of care in intraclass correlation coefficient analysis, only SSD was in strong disagreement regarding progressive motility and DFI [0.26, 95%CI (- 0.2, 0.58), and 0.17, 95%CI (- 0.19, 0.45), respectively]. When controlling for abstinence duration, DFI was significantly lower after both MACS and SSD compared to DGC [- 0.27%, 95%CI (- 0.47, - 0.06), p = 0.01, and - 0.6%, 95%CI (- 0.80, - 0.41), p < 0.001, respectively]. Further comparisons between SSD and MACS indicate significantly less apoptotic cells [Median (IQR) 4 (5), 95%CI (4.1, - 6.8) vs Median (IQR) 5 (8), 95%CI (4.9, - 9.2), p < 0.001, respectively] and dead cells [Median (IQR) 9.5 (23.3), 95%CI (13.2, - 22.4) vs Median (IQR) 22 (28), 95%CI (23.1, - 36.8), p < 0.001, respectively] in the SSD group.

CONCLUSION

The selection of a population of highly motile spermatozoa with less damaged DNA from unprocessed semen is ideally performed with SSD. Question remains whether this method improves the embryological outcomes in the IVF laboratory.

Sperm Preparation with Microfluidic Sperm Sorting Chip May Improve Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Outcomes Compared to Density Gradient Centrifugation

Does sperm preparation using the FERTILE PLUS™ Sperm Sorting Chip improve fertilization rates, blastocyst formation, utilization, and euploidy rates in patients undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), compared with density gradient centrifugation (DGC)? A single-cohort, retrospective data review including data from 53 couples who underwent ICSI cycles within a 12-month period. For each couple, the two closest, consecutive cycles were identified, where one used the standard technique of sperm preparation (DGC) and the subsequent used FERTILE PLUS™, therefore, couples acted as their own controls. Paired samples t-test was used to compare means for the outcomes (fertilization, blastocyst formation, utilization, and euploidy rates). Binary logistic regression analysis assessed the relationship between female age, the presence of male factor infertility, and euploidy rates. Blastocyst, utilization, and euploidy rates were significantly higher for cycles using FERTILE PLUS™ compared to DGC (76% vs 56%, p = 0.002; 60% vs 41%, p = 0.005, and 40% vs 20%, p = 0.001, respectively). Although there was an increase in fertilization rates for cycles using FERTILE PLUS™, this was not significant (72% vs 68%, p = 0.449). The euploidy rates of females ≤ 35 years were significantly increased when the FERTILE PLUS™ sperm preparation method was used, compared to the older age group (OR 2.31, p = 0.007). No significant association was found between the presence or absence of male factor infertility and euploidy rates between the two cycles. This study provides tentative evidence that the FERTILE PLUS™ microfluidic sorting device for sperm selection can improve blastocyst formation, utilization, and euploidy rates following ICSI in comparison to the DGC method.

Does microfluidic sperm selection improve clinical pregnancy and miscarriage outcomes in assisted reproductive treatments? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The microfluidic sperm selection (MFSS) device has emerged as a promising adjunct in assisted reproduction treatments (ART). It employs mechanisms of biomimicry based on the microanatomy of the female reproductive tract through strategies like chemotaxis and rheotaxis. Numerous studies assert improvements in ART outcomes with the use of MFSS, often attributed to the theoretical reduction in sperm DNA damage compared to other techniques. However, these attributed benefits lack validation through large-scale clinical trials, and there is no significant evidence of enhanced assisted reproductive treatments (ART) outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the utilization of MFSS enhances clinical pregnancy results and abortion outcomes in couples undergoing ART compared to standard sperm selection techniques for Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI). We also assessed laboratory outcomes as a supplementary analysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted searches across databases including PubMed, NIH, LILACS, CENTRAL, Crossref, Scopus, and OpenAlex. A total of 1,255 records were identified. From these, 284 duplicate records were eliminated, and an additional 895 records were excluded due to their association with patent applications, diagnostic tests, forensic analyses, or irrelevance to the research focus. Among the initially eligible 76 studies, 63 were excluded, encompassing abstracts, studies lacking adequate control groups, and ongoing clinical trials. Ultimately, 13 studies were selected for inclusion in the ensuing meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Regarding clinical pregnancy, we assessed a total of 868 instances of clinical pregnancies out of 1,646 embryo transfers. Regarding miscarriage, we examined 95 cases of pregnancy loss among the 598 confirmed clinical pregnancies in these studies.

CONCLUSION

The utilization of MFSS demonstrates marginal positive outcomes compared to standard sperm selection techniques, without statistical significance in any of the analyses.

BROADER IMPLICATIONS

This study conducted the first meta-analysis to evaluate clinical pregnancy rates, miscarriage rates, and laboratory results associated with the use of MFSS compared to standard sperm selection techniques. We have also listed potentially eligible studies for future inclusion. It's important to emphasize the need for multicenter studies with standardized parameters to attain a more robust clarification of this issue.

Sperm DNA Damage and Its Relevance in Fertility Treatment: A Review of Recent Literature and Current Practice Guidelines

Sperm deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) damage has recently emerged as one of the most controversial topics in male reproductive medicine. While level I evidence indicates that abnormal sperm DNA damage has substantial adverse effects on reproductive outcomes (including chance of pregnancy and risk of miscarriage), there is limited consensus on how sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) testing should be performed and/or interpreted in clinical practice. In this article, we review: (1) how SDF is assessed, (2) cumulative evidence regarding its impact on reproductive outcomes, (3) methods for mitigating high SDF, and (4) the most recent practice guidelines available for clinicians regarding the use and interpretation of SDF testing.

A comparison between the Felix™ electrophoretic system of sperm isolation and conventional density gradient centrifugation: a multicentre analysis

PURPOSE

Developing optimized techniques for the isolation of human spermatozoa possessing low levels of DNA damage is an important objective for the ART industry. The purpose of this study was to compare a novel electrophoretic system (Felix™) of sperm isolation with a conventional method involving density gradient centrifugation (DGC).

METHODS

Five international ART Centres in Australia, India, Sweden, the USA, and China have collaborated in order to compare the quality of the sperm populations isolated by Felix™ and DGC in terms of processing time, sperm concentration, motility, vitality, and DNA integrity as assessed by 3 methods: SCSA, Halo, and TUNEL.

RESULTS

Across all centers, 112 comparisons were performed. Although significant differences were noted between centers in terms of the quality of the semen samples subjected for analysis, overall, both methods were equally capable of isolating populations of spermatozoa exhibiting high levels of vitality and progressive motility. The absolute numbers of spermatozoa recovered were significantly (p < 0.001) lower with the Felix™ device although sperm quality was higher with 4/5 centers reporting a significant improvement in DNA integrity relative to DGC (p < 0.01-p < 0.001). In practical terms, the Felix™ device featured a standardized 6 min preparation time whereas clinical DGC protocols varied from center to center but generally took around 40 min to complete.

CONCLUSIONS

The Felix™ device is a positive technical development capable of isolating suspensions of highly motile spermatozoa exhibiting low levels of DNA damage in a fraction of the time taken by conventional procedures such as DGC.

Evolution of the basic semen analysis and processing sperm

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The sixth edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen was recently published with specific step-by-step instructions for semen evaluation and sperm processing. Point-of-care (POC) testing for semen evaluation and microfluidics for sperm processing are rapidly evolving technologies that could impact how we evaluate and process sperm. Understanding the updated manual in the context of these novel technologies is important.

RECENT FINDINGS

Proper standardization of semen evaluation and sperm processing will allow for consistent high-quality results among laboratories worldwide. POC testing could improve access to semen evaluations that generate referrals to male infertility specialists for further assessment. Microfluidics can select functional sperm with decreased DNA fragmentation in semen and testicular biopsy samples for assisted reproductive technology (ART). Clinical outcomes, such as pregnancy rates and live birth rates, have not been shown to be consistently improved with these technologies compared to conventional techniques, although high level evidence research in this area is limited.

SUMMARY

POC testing and microfluidics have the potential to be combined with machine learning technologies to improve fertility care. If these technologies are appropriately optimized, they could change how we evaluate and process sperm, and potentially lead to improved ART outcomes.