A point of confusion for embryologists in the identification of viable spermatozoa by the eosin-nigrosin test

Clinical and neonatal outcomes of using a modified micro cryotube for cryopreservation of small numbers of spermatozoa for TESA-ICSI cycles

Cryopreservation of a small number of human spermatozoa is still a major challenge for embryologists. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical pregnancy and neonatal outcomes of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) using a modified micro cryotube as freezing carrier for freezing small numbers of human spermatozoa collected by testicular sperm aspiration (TESA). We conducted a retrospective study to analyses the ICSI outcomes of using frozen-thawed few testicular spermatozoa in males with obstructive azoospermia (OA) from June 2017 to June 2021. Of 155 ICSI treatment cycles, 79 cycles were allocated to frozen sperm group and a modified micro cryotube was used for freezing testicular sperm, 76 cycles were allocated as fresh sperm group. No significant differences were observed in fertilization rate, good quality embryo rate, and blastocyst rate between the frozen sperm group and fresh sperm group (P > 0.05). Similarly, in the fresh embryo transfer cycles plus the first frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles, the total clinical pregnancy rate (54.43% vs 57.89%), implantation rate (46.08% vs 49.47%), miscarriage rate (13.95% vs 13.64%) and live birth rate (45.57% vs 48.68%) were not statistically different between the frozen and fresh sperm groups (P > 0.05). In addition, there was no statistical differences in the mean gestational age (38.33weeks ± 1.74 vs 37.89weeks ± 1.87), preterm delivery rate (5.56% vs 10.81%), mean birth weight at delivery (3026.50 g ± 577.64 vs 2977.56 g ± 528.93), and low birth weight (12.50% vs 19.51%) between the two groups (P > 0.05 in all cases). Modified micro cryotube for cryopreservation of rare testicula rretrieved spermatozoa did not negatively affect the pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in TESA-ICSI cycles. The presented method may be a useful alternative for cryopreservation of small numbers of human spermatozoa in clinical setting.

The use of ICSI in ART: evidence for practice

This article reviews the evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). It provides evidence-based clinical and laboratory guidelines and recommendations for use of ICSI within an assisted reproductive technology (ART) service. The guidelines address the evidence for the use of ICSI rather than conventional IVF (cIVF); the use of ART techniques supplementary to ICSI; and risks associated with ICSI. This article is not intended to be the only approved standard of practice or to dictate an exclusive course of treatment. Other plans of management may be appropriate, taking into account the needs and medical history of the patient, available resources, and institutional or clinical practice limitations.

Laser-assisted selection of immotile spermatozoa has no effect on obstetric and neonatal outcomes of TESA-ICSI pregnancies

BACKGROUND

Azoospermic patients have benefited from both epididymal and testicular spermatozoa intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment and lasers have been used to identify viable, immotile spermatozoa before the procedure. There are limited studies on the safety of laser-assisted selection of immotile spermatozoa. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of laser-assisted selection of immotile spermatozoa on the obstetric and neonatal outcomes after ICSI.

METHODS

A retrospective comparative study was conducted on outcomes of ICSI cycles with testicular spermatozoa from June 2014 to June 2018. Of 132 cycles, 33 were allocated to the test group and oocytes were injected with immotile spermatozoa selected by laser, 99 cycles were allocated as control group.

RESULTS

Compared with the control group, no significant differences were found in the pregnancy, implantation, miscarriage and live birth rates in the test group in either fresh or frozen transfer cycles. The cumulative live birth rate in the test group was 69.70%, which was slightly higher than in the control group (60.61%), but this was not statistically different. There were no differences in the average gestational age, premature birth rate, neonatal birth weight, and the malformation rate between the test and control groups (P > 0.05). In addition, the obstetric outcome between the two groups were not different (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

No negative effect on perinatal and neonatal outcomes was seen by using laser-assisted selection of immotile spermatozoa for TESA-ICSI. This study endorses the use of laser-assisted selection of viable spermatozoa for ICSI cycles.