Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp 215–220

ANDROLOGY: Relationships Between Sperm Motility Characteristics Assessed by the Computer-Aided Sperm Analysis (CASA) and Fertilization Rates In Vitro

  • Yuki Hirano
  • Hiroaki Shibahara
  • Hiromi Obara
  • Tatsuya Suzuki
  • Satoru Takamizawa
  • Chieko Yamaguchi
  • Hiromichi Tsunoda
  • Ikuo Sato
Article
  • 381 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose: Some studies have suggested that computer-aided sperm analysis (CASA) estimates of concentration and movement characteristics of progressively motile spermatozoa are related to fertilization rates in vitro. However, it has also been suggested that the greater number of motility parameters assessed by CASA does not imply more precision in predicting fertility. This study was carried out to investigate the relationships between the CASA estimates and fertilization rates in vitro.

Methods: Semen quality analysis was performed using CASA in 136 in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) cycles with at least 3 oocytes collected. The CASA estimates before and after swim-up were compared between 108 cycles with fertilization rate >50% (“good” group) and 28 cycles with fertilization rate ≤50% (“poor” group).

Results: Before swim-up, there were significant correlations between fertilization rates and CASA estimates, including amplitude of lateral head displacement (ALH) (r = .269), curvilinear velocity (VCL) (r = .297), straight line velocity (VSL) (r = .266), and rapid sprm movement (Rapid) (r = .243). There was also a significant correlation between the fertilization rates and straightness (STR) after swim-up (r = −0.178). As for sperm movement characteristics, there were significant differences of ALH (p < .005), VCL (p < .001), VSL (p < .005), and Rapid (p < .01) between “good” and “poor” groups before swim-up. After swim-up, there were significant differences of VCL (p < .005), average path velocity (VAP) (p < .005), and Rapid (p < .05) between the two groups.

Conclusions: These results indicate that some of the CASA estimates provide reliable estimation of the fertilizing ability of human sperm. There were significant differences of the two sperm movement characteristics, including VCL and Rapid (before and after swim-up), indicating that the total distance traveled by rapid sperm movement might be important in human sperm fertilizing abilities.

Computer-aided sperm analysis fertilization sperm motility 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Smith KD, Rodriguez-Rigau LJ, Steinberger E: Relation between indices of semen analysis and pregnancy rate in infertile couples. Fertil Steril 1977;28:1314-1319Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aitken RJ, Best FS, Warner P, Templeton A: A prospective study of the relationship between semen quality and fertility in cases of unexplained infertility. J Androl 1984;5:297-303Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Irvine DS, Aitken RJ: Predictive value of in-vitro sperm function tests in the context of an AID service. Hum Reprod 1986;8:539-545Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ducot B, Spira A, Feneux D, Jouannet P: Male factors and the likelihood of pregnancy in infertile couples. II. Study of clinical characteristics-practical consequences. Int J Androl 1988;11:395-404Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bostofte E, Bagger P, Michael A, Stakemann G: Fertility prognosis for infertile men: Results of follow-up study of semen analysis in infertile men from two different populations evaluated by the Cox regression model. Fertil Steril 1990;54:1100-1106Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shibahara H, Mitsuo M, Inoue M, Hasegawa A, Shigeta M, Koyama K: Relationship between human in-vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection and the zona-free hamster egg penetration test. Hum Reprod 1998;13:1928-1932Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shibahara H, Naito S, Hasegawa A, Mitsuo M, Shigeta M, Koyama K: Evaluation of sperm fertilizing ability using the Sperm Quality Analyzer. Int J Androl 1997;20:112-117Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shibahara H, Hamada Y, Hasegawa A, Wakimoto E, Toji H, Shigeta M, Koyama K: Relationship between the sperm motility index assessed by the Sperm Quality Analyzer and the outcome on intracytoplasmic sperm injection. J Assist Reprod Genet 1999;16:540-545Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Obara H, Shibahara H, Tsunoda H, Taneichi A, Fujiwara H, Takamizawa S, Idei S, Sato I: Prediction of unexpectedly poor fertilization and pregnancy outcome using the strict criteria for sperm morphology before and after sperm separation in IVFET. Int J Androl 2001 (in press)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aitken RJ, Sutton M, Warner P, Richardson DW: Relationship between the movement characteristics of human spermatozoa and their ability to penetrate cervical mucus and zonafree hamster oocytes. J Reprod Fertil 1985;73:441-449Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Katz DF, Overstreet JW, Samuels SJ, Niswander PW, Bloom TD, Lewis EL: Morphometric analysis of spermatozoa in the assessment of human male fertility. J Androl 1986;7:203-210Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jeulin C, Feneux D, Serres C, Jouannet P, Guillet-Rosso F, Belaisch-Allart J, Frydman R, Testart J: Sperm factors related to failure of human in-vitro fertilization. J Reprod Fertil 1986;76:735-744Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kruger TF, Menkveld R, Stander FS, Lombard CJ, van der Merwe JP, van Jyl JA, Smith K: Sperm morphologic features as a prognostic factor in in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1986;46:1118-1123Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lucena E, Lucena C, Gomez M, Ortiz JA, Ruiz J, Arango A, Diaz C, Beuerman C: Recovery of motile sperm using the migration-sedimentation technique in an in-vitro fertilization-embryo transfer programme. Hum Reprod 1989;4:163-165Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    World Health Organization: WHO laboratory manual for the examination of human semen and sperm-cervical mucus interaction. 4th edn., Cambridge Univ Press, 1999Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Eimers JM, te Velde ER, Gerritse R, Vogelzang ET, Looman CW, Habbema JD: The prediction of the chance to conceive in subfertile couples. Fertil Steril 1994;61:44-52Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Check JH, Bollendorf A, Lee MA, Nazari A, Nowroozi K: Correlation of computerized semen analysis with successful fertilization of oocytes in an in vitro fertilization program. Arch Androl 1990;24:229-234Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liu DY, Clarke CN, Gordon Baker HW: Relationship between sperm motility assessed with the Hamilton-Thorn motility analyzer and fertilization rates in vitro. J Androl 1991;12:231-239Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Barratt CLR, Tomlinson MJ, Cooke ID: Prognostic significance of computerized motility analysis for in vivo fertility. Fertil Steril 1993;60:520-525Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sukcharoen N, Keith J, Irvine DS, Aitken RJ: Prediction of the in-vitro fertilization (IVF) potential of human spermatozoa using sperm function tests: The effect of the delay between testing and IVF. Hum Reprod 1996;11:1030-1034Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Joshi N, Kodwany G, Balaiah D, Parikh M, Parikh F: The importance of computer-assisted semen analysis and sperm function testing in an IVF program. Int J Fertil 1996;41:46-52Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Oehninger S, Franken DR, Sayed E, Barroso G, Kolm P: Sperm function assays and their predictive value for fertilization outcome in IVF therapy: A meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2000;6:160-168Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuki Hirano
    • 1
  • Hiroaki Shibahara
    • 1
  • Hiromi Obara
    • 1
  • Tatsuya Suzuki
    • 1
  • Satoru Takamizawa
    • 1
  • Chieko Yamaguchi
    • 2
  • Hiromichi Tsunoda
    • 2
  • Ikuo Sato
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyJichi Medical SchoolTochigiJapan
  2. 2.Department of Clinical LaboratoryJichi Medical SchoolTochigi, Japan

Personalised recommendations