Selection of birefringent spermatozoa under Polscope: effect on intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcome

Non-Obstructive Azoospermia and Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection: Unveiling the Chances of Success and Possible Consequences for Offspring

Non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) is found in up to 15% of infertile men. While several causes for NOA have been identified, the exact etiology remains unknown in many patients. Advances in assisted reproductive technology, including intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) and testicular sperm retrieval, have provided hope for these patients. This review summarizes the chances of success with ICSI for NOA patients and examines preoperative factors and laboratory techniques associated with positive outcomes. Furthermore, we reviewed possible consequences for offspring by the use of ICSI with testicular sperm retrieved from NOA patients and the interventions that could potentially mitigate risks. Testicular sperm retrieved from NOA patients may exhibit increased chromosomal abnormalities, and although lower fertilization and pregnancy rates are reported in NOA patients compared to other forms of infertility, the available evidence does not suggest a significant increase in miscarriage rate, congenital malformation, or developmental delay in their offspring compared to the offspring of patients with less severe forms of infertility or the offspring of fertile men. However, due to limited data, NOA patients should receive specialized reproductive care and personalized management. Counseling of NOA patients is essential before initiating any fertility enhancement treatment not only to mitigate health risks associated with NOA but also to enhance the chances of successful outcomes and minimize possible risks to the offspring.

Male Infertility: New Developments, Current Challenges, and Future Directions

There have been many significant scientific advances in the diagnostics and treatment modalities in the field of male infertility in recent decades. Examples of these include assisted reproductive technologies, sperm selection techniques for intracytoplasmic sperm injection, surgical procedures for sperm retrieval, and novel tests of sperm function. However, there is certainly a need for new developments in this field. In this review, we discuss advances in the management of male infertility, such as seminal oxidative stress testing, sperm DNA fragmentation testing, genetic and epigenetic tests, genetic manipulations, artificial intelligence, personalized medicine, and telemedicine. The role of the reproductive urologist will continue to expand in future years to address different topzics related to diverse questions and controversies of pathophysiology, diagnosis, and therapy of male infertility, training researchers and physicians in medical and scientific research in reproductive urology/andrology, and further development of andrology as an independent specialty.

Selecting motile, non-apoptotic and induced spermatozoa for capacitation without centrifuging by MACS-Up method

In newly improved MACS-Up method, magnetic field has been applied to separate non-apoptotic spermatozoa directly from the neat semen. The spermatozoa during passing through a viscous layer, located on the neat semen, contacted with progesterone and induced for the capacitation. Then, a clean population of non-apoptotic, and capacitated spermatozoa were selected in the pure culture media. Selected spermatozoa may be useful for use in ART. The 80 semen samples from normozoospermic individuals were divided separately into 4 attempts. Semen analysis, SCSA (sperm chromatin structure assay), FLICA (fluorescein-labelled inhibitors of caspase) methods, immunoassay of phosphorylation of tyrosine residues of sperm proteins, nuclear DNA integrity, caspase 3 activity and sperm capacitation rate were all performed for evaluation of sperm parameters respectively. To examine all aspects, the MACS-Up method compared with DGC (density gradient centrifuging) and MACS-DGC methods separately. This method can isolate non-apoptotic spermatozoa directly from the neat semen, which has similar performance compared to the MACS-DGC method. Movement and passing spermatozoa through the viscous layer, and contact with progesterone, significantly induced spermatozoa for capacitation compared with the control group. Also, the MACS-Up in comparison with routine DGC method could select spermatozoa with significantly higher total and progressive motility, DNA integrity, induced sperm population for capacitation and normal morphology. MACS-Up can be developed as an effective, short-time, and ease of performing method and used practically to select functional spermatozoa as novel sperm selection procedure. However, for clinical use of MACS-Up, all clinical aspects of this method should be considered and evaluated.

Sperm Selection for ICSI: Do We Have a Winner?

In assisted reproductive technology (ART), the aim of sperm cells’ preparation is to select competent spermatozoa with the highest fertilization potential and in this context, the intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) represents the most applied technique for fertilization. This makes the process of identifying the perfect spermatozoa extremely important. A number of methods have now been developed to mimic some of the natural selection processes that exist in the female reproductive tract. Although many studies have been conducted to identify the election technique, many doubts and disagreements still remain. In this review, we will discuss all the sperm cell selection techniques currently available for ICSI, starting from the most basic methodologies and continuing with those techniques suitable for sperm cells with reduced motility. Furthermore, different techniques that exploit some sperm membrane characteristics and the most advanced strategy for sperm selection based on microfluidics, will be examined. Finally, a new sperm selection method based on a micro swim-up directly on the ICSI dish will be analyzed. Eventually, advantages and disadvantages of each technique will be debated, trying to draw reasonable conclusions on their efficacy in order to establish the gold standard method.

Sperm Selection Procedures for Optimizing the Outcome of ICSI in Patients with NOA

Retrieving spermatozoa from the testicles has been a great hope for patients with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA), but relevant methods have not yet been developed to the level necessary to provide resolutions for all cases of NOA. Although performing testicular sperm extraction under microscopic magnification has increased sperm retrieval rates, in vitro selection and processing of quality sperm plays an essential role in the success of in vitro fertilization. Moreover, sperm cryopreservation is widely used in assisted reproductive technologies, whether for therapeutic purposes or for future fertility preservation. In recent years, there have been new developments using advanced technologies to freeze and preserve even very small numbers of sperm for which conventional techniques are inadequate. The present review provides an up-to-date summary of current strategies for maximizing sperm recovery from surgically obtained testicular samples and, as an extension, optimization of in vitro sperm processing techniques in the management of NOA.

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.

Advanced sperm selection techniques for assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND

Assisted reproductive technologies (ART) including in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), combine gametes to enhance the probability of fertilisation and pregnancy. Advanced sperm selection techniques are increasingly employed in ART, most commonly in cycles utilising ICSI. Advanced sperm selection techniques are proposed to improve the chance that structurally intact and mature sperm with high DNA integrity are selected for fertilisation. Strategies include selection according to surface charge; sperm apoptosis; sperm birefringence; ability to bind to hyaluronic acid; and sperm morphology under ultra-high magnification. These techniques are intended to improve ART outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of advanced sperm selection techniques on ART outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of electronic databases (Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL); trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform); conference abstracts (Web of Knowledge); and grey literature (OpenGrey) for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We handsearched the reference lists of included studies and similar reviews. The search was conducted in June 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing advanced sperm selection techniques versus standard IVF, ICSI, or another technique. We excluded studies of intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection (IMSI), as they are subject to a separate Cochrane Review. Primary outcomes measured were live birth and miscarriage per woman randomly assigned. Secondary outcome measures included clinical pregnancy per woman randomly assigned. Secondary adverse events measured included miscarriage per clinical pregnancy and foetal abnormality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. Any disagreements were resolved by consultation with a third review author. We consulted study investigators to resolve queries. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We combined studies using a fixed-effect model. We evaluated the quality of the evidence using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight RCTs (4147 women). The quality of evidence ranged from very low to low. The main limitations were imprecision, performance bias, and attrition bias.Hyaluronic acid selected sperm-intracytoplasmic sperm injection (HA-ICSI) compared to ICSITwo RCTs compared the effects of HA-ICSI versus ICSI on live birth. The quality of the evidence was low. There may be little or no difference between groups: 25% chance of live birth with ICSI versus 24.5% to 31% with HA-ICSI (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.23, 2903 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence). Three RCTs reported on miscarriage. HA-ICSI may decrease miscarriage per woman randomly assigned: 7% chance of miscarriage with ICSI versus 3% to 6% chance with HA-ICSI (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.83, 3005 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence) and per clinical pregnancy: 20% chance of miscarriage with ICSI compared to 9% to 16% chance with HA-ICSI (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.82, 1065 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence). Four RCTs reported on clinical pregnancy. There may be little or no difference between groups: 37% chance of pregnancy with ICSI versus 34% to 40% chance with HA-ICSI (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.09, 3492 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence).HA-ICSI compared to SpermSlowOne RCT compared HA-ICSI to SpermSlow. The quality of the evidence was very low. We are uncertain whether HA-ICSI improves live birth compared to SpermSlow (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.01, 100 women) or clinical pregnancy (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.68, 100 women). We are uncertain whether HA-ICSI reduces miscarriage per woman (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.23 to 2.81, 100 women) or per clinical pregnancy (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.44, 41 women).Magnetic-activated cell sorting (MACS) compared to ICSIOne RCT compared MACS to ICSI for live birth; three reported clinical pregnancy; and two reported miscarriage. The quality of the evidence was very low. We are uncertain whether MACS improves live birth (RR 1.95, 95% CI 0.89 to 4.29, 62 women) or clinical pregnancy (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.31, 413 women, I2 = 81%). We are also uncertain if MACS reduces miscarriage per woman (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.16 to 5.63, 150 women, I2 = 0%) or per clinical pregnancy (RR 0.51, 95%CI 0.09 to 2.82, 53 women, I2=0)Zeta sperm selection compared to ICSIOne RCT evaluated Zeta sperm selection. The quality of the evidence was very low. We are uncertain of the effect of Zeta sperm selection on live birth (RR 2.48, 95% CI 1.34 to 4.56, 203 women) or clinical pregnancy (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.75, 203 women). We are also uncertain if Zeta sperm selection reduces miscarriage per woman (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.16 to 3.37, 203 women) or per clinical pregnancy (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.68, 1 RCT, 62 women).MACS compared to HA-ICSIOne RCT compared MACS to HA-ICSI. This study did not report on live birth. The quality of the evidence was very low. We are uncertain of the effect on miscarriage per woman (RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.10 to 23.35, 78 women) or per clinical pregnancy (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.07 to 15.64, 37 women). We are also uncertain of the effect on clinical pregnancy (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.27, 78 women).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence suggests that sperm selected by hyaluronic acid binding may have little or no effect on live birth or clinical pregnancy but may reduce miscarriage. We are uncertain of the effect of Zeta sperm selection on live birth, clinical pregnancy, and miscarriage due principally to the very low quality of the evidence for this intervention. We are uncertain of the effect of the other selection techniques on live birth, miscarriage, or pregnancy.Further high-quality studies, including the awaited data from the identified ongoing studies, are required to evaluate whether any of these advanced sperm selection techniques can be recommended for use in routine practice.

The clinical and neonatal outcomes after stimulation of immotile spermatozoa using SperMagic medium

To evaluate the efficiency and safety of SperMagic medium on stimulating the immotile spermatozoa in testicular sperm extraction (TESE) and absolute asthenozoospermia, 96 patients with TESE and 106 patients with absolute asthenozoospermia were enrolled in this study. The motile spermatozoa were detected in 47 TESE patients and 68 absolute asthenozoospermia and these patients were assigned to control group. The immotile spermatozoa in 49 TESE patients and 34 absolute asthenozoospermia were stimulated with SperMagic medium. Patients were treated by standard intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). There were no significant differences in fertilisation, cleavage, implantation, pregnancy, live birth and neonatal outcomes. SperMagic medium does not increase incidence of adverse neonatal outcomes and is a reliable tool for selection of viable spermatozoa in ICSI.

Strategies to improve fertilisation rates with assisted conception: a systematic review

Successful fertilisation is one of the key steps determining success of assisted conception. Various factors including sperm or oocyte pathology and environmental factors have a significant impact on fertilisation rates. This systematic review is aimed to evaluate the existing evidence about factors affecting fertilisation and strategies to improve fertilisation rates. A literature search was performed using Ovid MEDLINE ® (Jan 1950-April 2016), EMBASE (Jan 1950-April 2016), Ovid OLDMEDLINE ®, Pre-MEDLINE (Jan 1950-April 2016) and the Cochrane Library. Relevant key words were used to combine sets of results and a total 243 papers were screened. Only qualitative analysis was performed, as there was major heterogeneity in study design and methodology for quantitative synthesis. Factors affecting fertilisation were divided into sperm- and oocyte-related factors. The methods to improve fertilisation rates were grouped together based on the approach used to improve fertilisation rates. Optimising laboratory condition and procedural effects in techniques is associated with improved fertilisation rates. Various techniques are described to improve fertilisation rates including assisted oocyte activation, physiological intracytoplasmic sperm injection (PICSI) and intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection (IMSI). This review highlights the promising strategies under research to enhance fertilisation rates. Adequately powered multicentre randomised trials are required to evaluate these techniques before considering clinical application.

Processing and selection of surgically-retrieved sperm for ICSI: a review

Although the technique of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) has been a revolution in the alleviation of male infertility, the use of testicular sperm for ICSI was a formerly unseen breakthrough in the treatment of the azoospermic man with primary testicular failure. At the clinical level, different procedures of testicular sperm retrieval (conventional TESE, micro-TESE, FNA/TESA, MESA, PESA) are being performed, the choice is mainly based on the cause of azoospermia (obstructive versus non-obstructive) and the surgeon's skills. At the level of the IVF laboratory, mechanical procedures to harvest the sperm from the tissue may be combined with enzymatic treatment in order to increase the sperm recovery rates. A number of techniques have been developed for viable sperm selection in males with only immotile testicular sperm available. However, large, well-designed studies on the benefit and safety of one over the other technique are lacking. Despite all the available methods and combinations of laboratory procedures which have a common goal to maximize sperm recovery from testicular samples, a large proportion of NOA patients fail to father a genetically own child. Advanced technology application may improve recovery rates by detection of the testicular foci with active spermatogenesis and/or identification of the rare individual sperm in the testicular suspensions. On the other hand, in vitro spermatogenesis or sperm production from embryonic stem cells or induced pluripotent stem cells might be future options. The present review summarizes the available strategies which aim to maximize sperm recovery from surgically retrieved samples.

Advanced sperm selection techniques for assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND

Assisted reproductive technologies (ART) such as in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) bring together gametes outside of the body to enhance the probability of fertilisation and pregnancy. Advanced sperm selection techniques are increasingly being employed in ART, most commonly in cycles utilising ICSI. Advanced sperm selection techniques are thought to improve the chance that structurally intact and mature sperm with high DNA integrity are selected for fertilisation. Advanced sperm selection strategies include selection according to surface charge; sperm apoptosis; sperm birefringence; ability to bind to hyaluronic acid; and sperm morphology under ultra-high magnification. These techniques theoretically improve ART outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the impact of advanced sperm selection techniques on ART outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

Systematic search of electronic databases (Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information Database (LILACS)), trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), conference abstracts (Web of Knowledge) and grey literature (OpenGrey) for relevant randomised controlled trials. We handsearched the reference lists of included studies and similar reviews. The search was conducted in May 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing an advanced sperm selection technique versus standard IVF or ICSI or versus another advanced sperm selection technique. We excluded studies of sperm selection using ultra-high magnification (intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection, or IMSI), as they are the subject of a separate Cochrane review. Quasi-randomised and pseudo-randomised trials were excluded. Our primary outcome measure was live birth rate per woman randomly assigned. Secondary outcome measures included clinical pregnancy per woman randomly assigned, miscarriage per clinical pregnancy and fetal abnormality per clinical pregnancy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility of studies and risk of bias, and performed data extraction. Disagreements were resolved by consultation with a third review author. Study investigators were consulted to resolve other queries that arose. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We planned to combine studies using a fixed-effect model, if sufficient data were available. The quality of the evidence was evaluated using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods.

MAIN RESULTS

Two RCTs were included in the review. Both evaluated sperm selection by hyaluronanic acid binding for ICSI, but only one reported live births. No studies were identified that were related to surface charge selection, sperm apoptosis or sperm birefringence.One RCT compared hyaluronanic acid binding versus conventional ICSI. Live birth was not reported. Evidence was insufficient to show whether there was a difference between groups in clinical pregnancy rates (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.22, one RCT, 482 women). This evidence was deemed to be of low quality, mainly as the result of poor reporting of methods and findings. Miscarriage data were unclear, and fetal abnormality rates were not reported.The other RCT compared two different hyaluronanic acid binding techniques, SpermSlow and physiological intracytoplasmic sperm injection (PISCI). Evidence was insufficient to indicate whether there was a difference between groups in rates of live birth (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.05, one RCT, 99 women), clinical pregnancy (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.71, one RCT, 99 women) or miscarriage (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.44, one RCT, 41 women). The evidence for these comparisons was deemed to be of low quality, as it was limited by imprecision and poor reporting of study methods. Fetal abnormality rates were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence was insufficient to allow review authors to determine whether sperm selected by hyaluronanic acid binding improve live birth or pregnancy outcomes in ART, and no clear data on adverse effects were available. Evidence was also insufficient to show whether there is a difference in efficacy between the hyaluronic acid binding methods SpermSlow and PICSI. No randomised evidence evaluating sperm selection by sperm apoptosis, sperm birefringence or surface charge was found.Further studies of suitable quality are required to evaluate whether any of these advanced sperm selection techniques can be recommended for use in clinical practice.

Semen analysis: update on clinical value, current needs and future perspectives

At present, evaluation of male reproductive function consists primarily of routine semen analysis, a collection of conventional microscopic assessments ideally performed following the guidelines set by the World Health Organization. While providing some insight into testicular function, these long-performed tests are limited in the information that they impart; more specifically, they are unable to predict true fertility potential. As a consequence, there is a need for the appraisal and consideration of newer semen parameters that may be more indicative of reproductive success. Although various novel assays have been introduced that broaden the scope of information available to both researcher and clinician, the utility of these tests remains limited due to the lack of standardisation of protocols and the absence of clinically established, dependable reference ranges. As such, it is not surprising that most of these parameters and their associated methods remain recommended for ‘research purposes only’. With the burgeoning ‘omics’ revolution, nanotechnology and the development of new analytical instruments, there is now an opportunity for the identification and measurement of previously unknown features that may prove to be more indicative of each sperm's true functional status and capability. Once optimised, simplified, clinically validated and made more readily accessible, these new approaches hold the promise of forming the fulcrum upon which andrological investigations can enter a new era.