Sperm head vacuolization affects clinical outcome in ICSI cycle. A proposal of a cut-off value
- 230 Downloads
To evaluate the relationship between sperm nuclear vacuoles and sperm morphology and to investigate the influence of the rate of spermatozoa with head vacuolization (SVR) in a seminal sample on the clinical outcomes in couples undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection.
26 patients undergoing infertility investigations were included and were divided in two groups according to an SVR ≤ 20,28 % (Group A) or > 20,28 % (Group B), and were investigated to verify the influence of SVR on the fertilization rate, embryo quality, pregnancy and implantation rates.
Abnormal spermatozoa with nuclear vacuoles were significantly higher (p < 0.001) than the percentage of normal spermatozoa with nuclear vacuoles. Patients in group A had a percentage of abnormal sperm with nuclear vacuole significantly lower compared to group B (p < 0,001), but there was no difference in the percentage of normal sperm with nuclear vacuoles. Fertilization rates and the number of top quality embryos did not differ between the two groups. The pregnancy and implantation rates were significantly higher in Group A compared to Group B (respectively p < 0,05 and p < 0.001).
For the first time, we propose a cut off value in the proportion of sperms with nuclear vacuolization on the total of sperm in seminal samples, and demonstrate a relationship between SNV and clinical outcomes after ICSI. The SNV rate could be introduced as an easy diagnostic evaluation prior to perform an ICSI cycle.
KeywordsSperm nuclear vacuoles Sperm morphology ICSI outcome High magnification
- 10.Boitrelle F, Ferfouri F, Petit JM, Segretain D, Tourain C, Bergere M, Bailly M, Vialard F, Albert M, Selva J. Large human sperm vacuoles observed in motile spermatozoa under high magnification: nuclear thumbprint linked to failure of chromatin condensation. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:1650–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Ombelet W, Bosmans E, Janssen M, Cox A, Vlasselaer J, Gyselaere W, Vandeput H, Gielen J, Pollet H, Maes M, Steeno O, Kruger T. Semen parameters in a fertile versus subfertile population: a need for change in the interpretation of semen testing. Hum Reprod. 1997;12(5):987–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Saïdi R, Rives N, Gruel E, Mazurier S, Mousset-Siméon N, Macé B. Nouvelle classification du spermocytogramme à fort grossissement. Méd Reprod Gyn Endo. 2008;10:315–24.Google Scholar
- 31.Veeck LL. Atlas of the human oocyte and early conceptus. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1986.Google Scholar
- 32.Watanabe S, Tanaka A, Fujii S, Mizunuma H, Fukui A, Fukuhara R, Nakamura R, Yamada K, Tanaka I, Awata S, Nagayoshi M. An investigation of the potential effect of vacuoles in human sperm on DNA damage using a chromosome assay and the TUNEL assay. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(5):978–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.World Health Organization. WHO laboratory manual for examination and processing of human semen 5th ed Cambridge. UK: Cambridge University Press; 2010.Google Scholar