Normal sperm parameters per se do not reliably account for fertility: A case-control study in the real-life setting

One out of two idiopathic infertile men has pathologic sperm DNA fragmentation values: Potential implications for clinical practice

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the distribution of sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) values and their association with clinical and seminal parameters in idiopathic infertile men.

DESIGN, PATIENTS, MEASUREMENTS

Data from 3224 primary infertile men (belonging to couples having failed to conceive a pregnancy within 12 months) who underwent a thorough diagnostic work-up were analysed. A SDF value ≥ 30% (according to Sperm Chromatin Structure Assay) was considered pathologic. We excluded: (1) men with genetic abnormalities; (2) men with history of cryptorchidism; (3) men with biochemical hypogonadism; (4) men with clinical varicocele; and (5) men with other possible known aetiological factors. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses were used to describe the whole cohort.

RESULTS

Of all, 792 (23%) men with at least one abnormal WHO semen parameter but without any identified aetiologic factor for infertility, were considered as idiopathic infertile men. Of 792, 418 (52.7%) men had SDF ≥30%. Men with pathologic SDF were older (p = .02), had higher Follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) (p = .04) but lower total testosterone (p = .03) values than those with SDF <30%. The homoeostatic model assessment index for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) was higher in men with SDF ≥30% (p = .01). Idiopathic infertile men with SDF ≥30% presented with lower sperm concentration (p < .001) and lower progressive sperm motility (p < .01) than those with SDF < 30%. Logistic regression analysis revealed that older age (OR: 1.1, p = .02) and higher HOMA-IR score (OR: 1.8, p = .03) were associated with SDF ≥ 30%, after accounting for FSH and sperm concentration values.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately half of infertile men categorized as idiopathic had pathologic SDF values. Idiopathic infertile men with pathologic SDF showed worse clinical, hormonal and semen parameters than those with normal SDF values. These results suggest that including SDF testing could be clinically relevant over the real-life management work-up of infertile men.

Low Birth Weight is Associated with Sperm DNA Fragmentation and Assisted Reproductive Technology Outcomes in Primary Infertile Men: Results of a Cross-Sectional Study

PURPOSE

To assess the relationship between clinical and semen characteristics and assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcomes with different birth weight (BW) categories in a cohort of infertile men.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from 1,063 infertile men were analyzed. Patients with BW ≤2,500, 2,500-4,000, and ≥4,000 g were considered as having low BW (LBW), normal BW (NBW), and high BW (HBW), respectively. Testicular volume (TV) was assessed with a Prader orchidometer. Serum hormones were measured in all cases. Semen analyses were categorized based on 2021 World Health Organization reference criteria. Sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) was tested in every patient and considered pathological for SDF >30%. ART outcomes were available for 282 (26.5%) patients. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses detailed the association between semen parameters and clinical characteristics and the defined BW categories.

RESULTS

Of all, LBW, NBW, and HBW categories were found in 79 (7.5%), 807 (76.0%), and 177 (16.5%) men, respectively. LBW men had smaller TV, presented higher follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) but lower total testosterone levels compared to other groups (all p<0.01). Sperm progressive motility (p=0.01) and normal morphology (p<0.01) were lower and SDF values were higher (all p<0.01) in LBW compared to other groups. ART pregnancy outcomes were lower in LBW compared to both NBW and HBW categories (26.1% vs. 34.5% vs. 34.5%, p=0.01). At multivariable logistic regression analysis, LBW was associated with SDF >30% (odd ratio [OR] 3.7; p<0.001), after accounting for age, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), FSH, and TV. Similarly, LBW (OR 2.2; p<0.001), SDF >30% (OR 2.9; p<0.001) and partner's age (OR 1.3; p=0.001) were associated with negative ART outcomes, after accounting for the same predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

LBW was associated with impaired clinical and semen characteristics in infertile men compared to both NBW and HBW. SDF and ART outcomes were significantly worse in the LBW group.

Unraveling the Impact of Sperm DNA Fragmentation on Reproductive Outcomes

In recent years, there has been a growing interest in identifying subcellular causes of male infertility, and sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) research has been at the forefront of this focus. DNA damage can occur during spermatogenesis due to faulty chromatin compaction or excessive abortive apoptosis. It can also happen as sperm transit through the genital tract, often induced by oxidative stress. There are several methods for SDF testing, with the sperm chromatin structure assay, terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase d-UTI nick end labeling (TUNEL) assay, comet assay, and sperm chromatin dispersion test being the most commonly used. Numerous studies strongly support the negative impact of SDF on male fertility potential. DNA damage has been linked to various morphological and functional sperm abnormalities, ultimately affecting natural conception and assisted reproductive technology outcomes. This evidence-based review aims to explore how SDF influences male reproduction and provide insights into available therapeutic options to minimize its detrimental impact.

Clinical parameters associated with altered sperm DNA fragmentation index among primary infertile men: Findings from a real-life cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Recurrent pregnancy loss and unexplained infertility are the current indications to test sperm DNA fragmentation according to the European Association of Urology Guidelines on sexual and reproductive health.

OBJECTIVE

To identify a novel and better performing model to diagnose primary infertile men presenting with altered sperm DNA fragmentation and to outline its predictive ability in respect to current European Association of Urology Guidelines' recommendations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from the latest 515 consecutive primary infertile men as for World Health Organization criteria were analyzed. Semen analysis, sperm DNA fragmentation (according to sperm chromatin structure assay), and serum hormones were considered in every patient. Altered sperm DNA fragmentation was defined with levels greater than 30%. Descriptive statistics was applied to compare patients with normal versus SDF > 30%. The new predicting model was identified through logistic regression analysis exploring potential predictors of SDF > 30% at first clinical presentation. Diagnostic accuracy between the two predictive models (European Association of Urology Guidelines vs. new) was assessed, and decision curve analyses tested their clinical benefit.

RESULTS

Of 515, 268 (51.9%) patients had SDF > 30% at clinical presentation. Patients with SDF > 30% were older (median [interquartile range] 39 [35-43] vs. 37 [34-41] years), had lower mean testicular volume (Prader 15 [12-20] vs. 17.5 [13.5-20] and lower total motile sperm count (1.80 [0.7-13.2] vs. 11.82 [4.2-44.5] × 106 ), all p < 0.001. No other clinical differences were depicted. The two groups showed similar rates of history of recurrent pregnancy loss and unexplained infertility. At multivariable logistic regression analysis, age more than 38 years (odds ratio: 2.43) and baseline total motile sperm count less than 20 × 106 (odds ratio: 3.72) were associated with SDF > 30%, after adjusting for Prader < 15, history of miscarriages and unexplained infertility, all p < 0.0001. The newly identified model (unexplained infertility + history of poli-abortions + Prader < 15 + age ≥38 years + total motile sperm count <20 × 106 ) showed higher accuracy to identify SDF > 30% at baseline in respect to European Association of Urology Guidelines (area under the curve: 72.1 vs. 52.7), with superior clinical net benefit use.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of the European Association of Urology sexual and reproductive health guidelines does not ensure proper identification of primary infertile men with pathological sperm DNA fragmentation. We propose a novel and better performing predictive model to identify the infertile men with altered sperm DNA fragmentation at first clinical assessment.

DISCUSSION

As altered sperm DNA fragmentation has been widely linked with the inability to conceive, this second-level test could be further implemented over the diagnostic workup of a broader subset of patients presenting for male factor infertility. We propose a better performing model to identify this specific category of patients.

Male infertility

Clinical infertility is the inability of a couple to conceive after 12 months of trying. Male factors are estimated to contribute to 30-50% of cases of infertility. Infertility or reduced fertility can result from testicular dysfunction, endocrinopathies, lifestyle factors (such as tobacco and obesity), congenital anatomical factors, gonadotoxic exposures and ageing, among others. The evaluation of male infertility includes detailed history taking, focused physical examination and selective laboratory testing, including semen analysis. Treatments include lifestyle optimization, empirical or targeted medical therapy as well as surgical therapies that lead to measurable improvement in fertility. Although male infertility is recognized as a disease with effects on quality of life for both members of the infertile couple, fewer data exist on specific quantification and impact compared with other health-related conditions.

Does Air Pollution Impact on Semen Parameters? Findings from a Real-Life, Cross-Sectional Study in Italian Infertile Men

PURPOSE

In industrialized countries, air pollutants levels have been monitored closely for environmental and research issues. Using Italian data, we aimed to investigate the association between air pollutants levels and semen parameters in a cohort of non-Finnish white-European men presenting for couple's infertility.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Complete demographic and laboratory data from 1,152 infertile men consecutively assessed between January 2015 and January 2018 were analyzed. Semen analyses were based on the 2010 World Health Organization reference criteria. Health-significant comorbidities were scored with the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). We analyzed the annual average level of the three main markers of air pollution (Pm10, Pm2.5, and NO₂) between 2014 and 2018. Descriptive statistics, linear and logistic regression analyses tested the association between air pollutants levels and semen parameters.

RESULTS

Of 1,152 men, 87 (7.55%) had normal sperm parameters at first semen analysis. Of 1,065 patients with abnormal semen analyses, 237 (22.25%), 324 (30.42%), and 287 (26.95%) patients presented 1, 2 or 3 abnormalities, respectively, and 217 (20.38%) were azoospermic. At linear regression analysis, Pm10, Pm2.5, and NO₂ were negatively associated with sperm morphology (Pm10: β=-0.5288 µg/m³, p=0.001; Pm2.5: β=-0.5240 µg/m³, p=0.019; NO₂: β=-0.4396 µg/m³, p<0.0001). Furthermore, the adjusted odds of normal sperm morphology <4% were 1.06 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.09; p=0.007) for Pm10, 1.07 (95% CI, 1.03-1.11; p=0.007) for Pm 2.5, and 1.03 (95% CI, 1.02-1.05; p=0.001) for NO₂, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large homogenous cohort of infertile men, Pm10, Pm 2.5, and NO₂ levels were negatively associated with sperm morphology. Conversely, no clear association was observed with other macroscopic sperm parameters.

Is There a Relevant Clinical Impact in Differentiating Idiopathic versus Unexplained Male Infertility?

PURPOSE

Overall, male factor infertility (MFI) accounts for up to 50% of etiologies of couple's infertility, with almost 30% of MFI cases being idiopathic in nature. Idiopathic MFI does not support a tailored treatment work-up in clinical practice. To investigate rates of and characteristics of men presenting for idiopathic versus unexplained primary infertility as compared with same-ethnicity, age-comparable fertile men.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Demographic, clinical and laboratory data from 3,098 primary infertile men consecutively evaluated were analyzed and compared with those of 103 fertile controls. Idiopathic male infertility (IMI) was defined for abnormality at semen analysis with no previous history of diseases affecting fertility and normal findings on physical examination and genetic and laboratory testing. Unexplained male infertility (UMI) was defined as infertility of unknown origin with completely normal findings at semen analysis. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression models tested the association between clinical variables and idiopathic infertility status.

RESULTS

Overall, 570 (18.5%) and 154 (5.0%) patients depicted criteria suggestive for either IMI or UMI, respectively. Groups were similar in terms of age, BMI, CCI, recreational habits, hormonal milieu, and sperm DNA fragmentation indexes. Conversely, testicular volume was lower in IMI (p<0.001). Vitamin D3 levels were lower in IMI vs. UMI vs. fertile controls (p=0.01). At multivariable logistic regression analysis only vitamin D3 deficiency (OR, 9.67; p=0.03) was associated with IMI. Characteristics suggestive for IMI versus UMI were observed in almost 20% and 5% of men, respectively. Overall, clinical differences between groups were slightly significant and certainly not supportive of a tailored management work-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Current findings further support the urgent need of a more detailed and comprehensive assessment of infertile men to better tailoring their management work-up in the everyday clinical setting.

Exploring the potential impact of human papillomavirus on infertility and assisted reproductive technology outcomes

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a common sexually transmitted disease that has been linked to both cancer and reproductive health issues. While its impact on fertility and pregnancy success has been studied, there is still too little evidence about the influence of HPV on assisted reproductive technology (ART). Therefore, there exists a need for HPV testing in couples undergoing infertility treatments. Infertile men have been found to have a higher prevalence of seminal HPV infection, which can compromise sperm quality and reproductive function. As such, it could be important to investigate the correlation between HPV and ART outcomes in order to improve the quality of evidence. Understanding the potentially detrimental effects of HPV on ART outcomes may have promising important implications for the management of infertility. This minireview summarizes the so far limited developments in this area and highlights the major need for further well-designed studies to address this issue.

Infertile men with semen parameters above WHO reference limits at first assessment may deserve a second semen analysis: Challenging the guidelines in the real-life scenario

OBJECTIVES

To investigate which infertile men with semen parameters above WHO reference limits at first semen analysis deserve a second semen test.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from 1358 consecutive infertile men were analysed. Patients underwent two consecutive semen analyses at the same laboratory. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression models tested the association between clinical variables and semen parameters. A new predicting model was identified through logistic regression analysis exploring potential predictors of semen parameters below WHO reference limits after a previously normal one. Diagnostic accuracy of the new model was compared with AUA/ASRM and EAU guidelines. Decision curve analyses (DCA) tested their clinical benefit.

RESULTS

Of 1358, 212 (15.6%) infertile men had semen parameters above WHO reference limits at first analysis. Of 212, 87 (41.0%) had a second semen analysis with results above WHO reference limits. Men with sperm parameters below reference limits at second analysis had higher FSH values, but lower testicular volume (TV) (all p<0.01) compared to men with a second semen analysis above WHO limits. At multivariable logistic regression analysis, lower TV (OR 0.9, p = 0.03), higher FSH (OR 1.2, p<0.01), and lower total sperm count (OR 0.9, p<0.01) were associated with second semen analyses below WHO limits. DCA showed the superior net benefit of using the new model, compared to both AUA/ASRM and EAU guidelines to identify those men with a second semen sample below WHO limits after a previously normal one.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 60% of infertile men with a first semen analysis above WHO limits have a second analysis with results below limits. The newly identified risk model might be useful to select infertile men with initial semen results above WHO limits who deserve a second semen analysis.

Sperm DNA fragmentation testing in clinical management of reproductive medicine

Background

Approximately 8%-12% of couples worldwide face infertility, with infertility of individuals assigned male at birth (AMAB) contributing to at least 50% of cases. Conventional semen analysis commonly used to detect sperm abnormalities is insufficient, as 30% of AMAB patients experiencing infertility show normal results in this test. From a genetic perspective, the assessment of sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) is important as a parameter of sperm quality.

Methods

In this narrative study, we review and discuss pathophysiological causes, DNA repair mechanisms, and management of high SDF. We then summarize literature exploring the association between SDF and reproductive outcomes.

Main Findings

Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses have revealed a significant association between high SDF in AMAB individuals and adverse reproductive outcomes including embryo development, natural conception, intrauterine insemination, and in vitro fertilization. However, the association with live birth rates and pregnancy rates following intracytoplasmic injection remains inconclusive. The disparities among quantitative assays, inconsistent reference range values, absent high-quality prospective clinical trials, and clinical heterogeneity in AMAB patients with elevated SDF represent the main limitations affecting SDF testing.

Conclusion

The evaluation and management of SDF plays an important role in a subset of AMAB infertility, but widespread integration into clinical guidelines will require future high-quality clinical trials and assay standardization.

The impact of different WHO reference criteria for semen analysis in clinical practice: who will benefit from the new 2021 thresholds for normal semen parameters?

Background

In 2021, the World Health Organization (WHO) has provided the latest update on processing and evaluating semen analysis.

Objectives

To assess (i) the rate of discordance in semen parameters categorization across three different WHO reference values (namely WHO21, 2010 and 1999) and (ii) the clinical differences among discordant semen analyses from a cohort of primary infertile men.

Materials and methods

Data from 788 infertile men were analyzed. Semen parameters were interpreted based on WHO21, WHO10, and WHO99 reference criteria. Pregnancy outcomes with assisted reproductive techniques (ART) were available for 110 (14%) patients. Descriptive statistics was applied to describe potential differences among the three consecutive WHO references criteria.

Results

Semen parameters categorizations were highly different across the three groups (p < 0.001). Of all, 271 (42.2%) patients had normal semen parameters according to WHO10 but were pathologic when considered with WHO21 reference criteria (namely, men with increased semen abnormalities). Infertile men with increased semen abnormalities had lower testicular volume (p < 0.001) but higher FSH (p < 0.01) and LH (p < 0.001) values than those who had no change in terms of semen parameters categorization. Negative ART outcomes were more frequently reported in men with worsening semen parameters compared with those with confirmed semen parameters at WHO21 versus WHO10 (26.8% vs. 49%, p = 0.03). Conversely, infertile men with worsening semen parameters at WHO21 versus WHO99 were similar in terms of clinical and hormonal characteristics compared with those with the same rate of semen abnormalities.

Conclusions

One out of three infertile men showed worsened semen categorization according to WHO21 versus WHO10. Infertile men with worsening of semen parameters had worse clinical and hormonal characteristics than those with confirmed numbers of semen abnormalities. Moreover, live birth rates were lower in men with worsening semen abnormalities as for WHO21.

Evolution of the World Health Organization semen analysis manual: where are we?

The WHO (World Health Organization) manuals provide state-of-the-art guidance on how a semen analysis should be carried out. The much anticipated sixth edition of the WHO semen analysis manual has been released 10 years after its previous version and includes essential updates, such as new reference standards for semen volume and microscopic sperm characteristics of recent fathers. A well-conducted semen analysis remains an essential foundation of the infertility evaluation process and affects patient referral, diagnosis and treatment. However, a male infertility work-up primarily based on routine semen analysis does not provide men with an optimal fertility pathway; the primary reasons for routine semen analysis inadequacy in this context include its low predictive value for natural and assisted conception success, its inability to detect sperm DNA and epigenetic deficiencies that might negatively affect embryo development, implantation and offspring well-being, and the substantial overlap between semen parameters of fertile and subfertile individuals. Ideally, a full andrological assessment should be carried out by reproductive urologists in all men dealing with couple infertility and should include a detailed history analysis, physical examination, semen analysis, endocrine assessment and other tests as needed. Only through a complete male infertility work-up will relevant underlying medical and infertility conditions be revealed and potentially treated or alleviated. The ultimate goals of a comprehensive andrological assessment are to positively influence overall male health, pregnancy prospects and offspring well-being.

The association of impaired semen quality and pregnancy rates in assisted reproduction technology cycles: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Some studies suggest a relationship between semen quality and pregnancy rates of assisted reproduction technologies (ART). Others have questioned the utility of semen quality as proxy for fertility in couples attempting to conceive with or without assistance. We aimed to investigate the current body of evidence which correlates semen parameters and clinical pregnancy among couples utilizing ART (i.e. in vitro fertilization [IVF], intracytoplasmic sperm injection [ICSI]) through a systematic review and meta‐analysis of cross‐sectional and retrospective cohort studies. Pooled Odd Ratio (OR) for oligo‐, astheno‐ and teratospermic compared to normospermic number of ART cycles were calculated among. Meta‐regression and sub‐group analysis were implemented to model the contribution of clinical/demographic and laboratory standards differences among the studies. Overall, 17 studies were analysed representing 17,348 cycles were analysed. Pooled OR for impaired sperm concentration, motility and morphology was 1 (95%Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.97–1.03), 0.88 (95%CI: 0.73–1.03) and 0.88 (95%CI: 0.75–1) respectively. Further analysis on sperm morphology showed no differences with regard of IVF versus ICSI (p = 0.14) nor a significant correlation with rising reference thresholds (Coeff: −0.02, p = 0.38). A temporal trend towards a null association between semen parameters and clinical pregnancy was observed over the 20‐year observation period (Coeff: 0.01, p = 0.014). The current analysis found no association between semen quality (as measured by concentration, motility or morphology) and clinical pregnancy rates utilizing ART. Future investigations are necessary to explore the association between semen parameters and other ART outcomes (e.g. fertilization, implantation, birth and perinatal health).

Diagnostic and therapeutic workup of male infertility: results from a Delphi consensus panel

Male factor infertility (MFI) is a rising issue worldwide with significant socioeconomic costs and negative psychological consequences for the couple. Current guidelines provide recommendations for its diagnosis and treatment but several gaps in the management of MFI are encountered in clinical practice due to the lack of available evidence in published literature. Uncertainty in the management of MFI cases leads to a high degree of variability in therapeutic approaches. We planned a Delphi consensus method to provide insights and help bridge the gaps that separate clinical guidelines from real-world practice. The Advisory Board collected 41 statements on debated topics in the management of MFI, each including multiple items designed as a 5-point Likert scale. The questionnaire was sent by e-mail to a panel of Italian experts for a first round of voting; members of the panel were later invited to a second round of voting, preceded by discussion of the "hot topics" identified in the first round. At both rounds of the Delphi consensus 68 experts participated to the voting process. After the first round 25 statements were identified as hot topics, and these underwent the second round of voting. Consensus was reached on many, but not all cases, leaving vagueness on few debated topics where decisions are unsupported by clinical studies or driven by controversial results. In conclusion, indications emerging from this large panel of experts may help guide the management of male factor infertility in clinical practice. Studies are needed to address unanswered questions left by cases for whom no consensus was reached.

European Association of Urology Guidelines on Male Sexual and Reproductive Health: 2021 Update on Male Infertility

CONTEXT

The European Association of Urology (EAU) has updated its guidelines on sexual and reproductive health for 2021.

OBJECTIVE

To present a summary of the 2021 version of the EAU guidelines on sexual and reproductive health, including advances and areas of controversy in male infertility.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The panel performed a comprehensive literature review of novel data up to January 2021. The guidelines were updated and a strength rating for each recommendation was included that was based either on a systematic review of the literature or consensus opinion from the expert panel, where applicable.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The male partner in infertile couples should undergo a comprehensive urological assessment to identify and treat any modifiable risk factors causing fertility impairment. Infertile men are at a higher risk of harbouring and developing other diseases including malignancy and cardiovascular disease and should be screened for potential modifiable risk factors, such as hypogonadism. Sperm DNA fragmentation testing has emerged as a novel biomarker that can identify infertile men and provide information on the outcomes from assisted reproductive techniques. The role of hormone stimulation therapy in hypergonadotropic hypogonadal or eugonadal patients is controversial and is not recommended outside of clinical trials. Furthermore, there is insufficient evidence to support the widespread use of other empirical treatments and surgical interventions in clinical practice (such as antioxidants and surgical sperm retrieval in men without azoospermia). There is low-quality evidence to support the routine use of testicular fine-needle mapping as an alternative diagnostic and predictive tool before testicular sperm extraction (TESE) in men with nonobstructive azoospermia (NOA), and either conventional or microdissection TESE remains the surgical modality of choice for men with NOA.

CONCLUSIONS

All infertile men should undergo a comprehensive urological assessment to identify and treat any modifiable risk factors. Increasing data indicate that infertile men are at higher risk of cardiovascular mortality and of developing cancers and should be screened and counselled accordingly. There is low-quality evidence supporting the use of empirical treatments and interventions currently used in clinical practice; the efficacy of these therapies needs to be validated in large-scale randomised controlled trials.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Approximately 50% of infertility will be due to problems with the male partner. Therefore, all infertile men should be assessed by a specialist with the expertise to not only help optimise their fertility but also because they are at higher risk of developing cardiovascular disease and cancer long term and therefore require appropriate counselling and management. There are many treatments and interventions for male infertility that have not been validated in high-quality studies and caution should be applied to their use in routine clinical practice.

The Effect of Antioxidant Supplementation on Operated or Non-Operated Varicocele-Associated Infertility: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

In patients with varicocele-associated infertility, the effect of antioxidant supplementation on fertility is unknown. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore their role in patients with operated or non-operated varicocele. We searched major databases and sources of grey literature until May 2021 (PROSPERO: CRD42021248195). We included 14 studies (980 individuals) in the systematic review. Of the 14 studies, 2 explored the effect of antioxidant supplementation in patients with non-operated varicocele, 1 compared antioxidants versus surgical repair of varicocele, while 11 explored antioxidants after surgical repair of varicocele and were also included in the meta-analysis. Regarding pregnancy rates, no significant differences were demonstrated after treatment with antioxidants versus no treatment at three (OR: 2.28, 95% CI: 0.7-7.48) and six months (OR: 1.88, 95% CI: 0.62-5.72). Accordingly, contradictory findings were reported in sperm concentration, morphology, and motility, as well as DNA fragmentation. Our findings indicate that antioxidant supplementation does not improve pregnancy rates and semen parameters in patients with varicocele-associated infertility, in the absence of previous screening for oxidative stress. Based on the previous notion, most included studies also raised methodological concerns. Therefore, definitive conclusions about the efficacy of antioxidant supplementation in this setting cannot be drawn and further research on the field is mandatory.

Infertile couples still undergo assisted reproductive treatments without initial andrological evaluation in the real-life setting: A failure to adhere to guidelines?

BACKGROUND

The EAU Guidelines on Male Sexual and Reproductive Health state that both partners of the infertile couple should undergo simultaneous investigation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the prevalence and the characteristics of infertile men who were referred for an andrological evaluation after failed attempts of Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) with those who were evaluated at the beginning of their infertility pathway at a single academic centre over a 17-year period.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data of 3213 primary infertile couples assessed between 2003 and 2020 were analysed. Descriptive statistics compared the overall characteristics of male partners of couples with (+ART) or without (-ART) previous ART prior to andrological consultation. Logistic regression models analysed variables associated with +ART. Local polynomial regression models explored the probability of +ART over the analysed time frame.

RESULTS

Of all, 493 (15.3%) participants were +ART. Patients and female partners' age were higher in +ART couples (all p≤0.04). Sperm concentration, progressive sperm motility and normal sperm morphology were lower in +ART than in -ART patients (all p<0.001), along with a greater percentage of non-obstructive azoospermia in +ART compared to -ART men (p<0.0001). At univariable analysis, patient age and partner age >35 years and a less recent assessment were associated with +ART status (all p≤0.04). Male age and less recent years of assessment were also independent predictors of +ART, after accounting for partner's age >35 years (all p<0.01). A not significant decrease of this pattern was observed throughout the last 7 years at local polynomial regression models.

DISCUSSION

Overall awareness towards the importance of a comprehensive evaluation for the male partner of every infertile couple should therefore be further strengthened.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 15% of couples still undergo ART without any initial andrological evaluation in the real-life setting. A not significant decrease in this trend was observed over most recent years. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Correlation among isolated teratozoospermia, sperm DNA fragmentation and markers of systemic inflammation in primary infertile men

Aim

To assess the prevalence of isolated teratozoospermia (iTZS) in a cohort of infertile and fertile men; explore the relationship between iTZS, inflammatory parameters and sperm DNA fragmentation index (SDF) in the same cohort.

Materials and methods

1824 infertile men and 103 fertile controls. Semen analysis, the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and serum hormones were investigated. DFI was tested in infertile men only. According to 2010 WHO semen analysis, patients were categorized in 3 sub-groups of isolated sperm defects: isolated oligozoospermia (iOZS), isolated asthenozoospermia (iAZS) and iTZS. Descriptive statistics and linear regression models tested the association between clinical variables and inflammatory markers.

Results

Among infertile men, iAZS, iTZS, and iOZS were found in 13.9%, 11.9% and 4.1% participants, respectively. iTZS was found in 37 (35.9%) fertile men. Infertile men with iTZS had higher NLR values than those with iOZS, iAZS and men with normal semen parameters (all p<0.001). FSH and LH were higher and inhibin B lower in iOZS infertile men compared to all other groups (p≤0.001). Hormonal characteristics were similar between iTZS infertile and fertile men. Similarly, iTZS infertile men had higher SDF than all other groups (all p<0.001). Infertile men with iTZS had higher NLR values than fertile men with iTZS (p<0.01). Linear regression analysis showed that, in infertile men, iTZS was associated with SDF and NLR (all p≤0.01).

Conclusions

iTZS was found in 11.9% of infertile men but it was even more prevalent in fertile controls. Infertile men with iTZS had higher NLR than fertile controls and increased SDF values than infertile participant with iAZS, iOZS, or normal semen parameters. No differences in hormonal characteristics were found between infertile and fertile men with iTZS.