Sperm Single-Stranded DNA, Detected by Acridine Orange Staining, Reduces Fertilization and Quality of ICSI-Derived Embryos

  • Irma Virant-Klun
  • Tomaz Tomazevic
  • Helena Meden-Vrtovec

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of sperm single-stranded DNA, detected by acridine orange (AO), and classical sperm parameters on embryonic quality after ICSI.

Methods: Before ICSI, the spermatozoa of 183 infertile patients with oligo-, astheno-, teratozoospermia (n = 147), or more than one previous unsuccessful conventional IVF attempt (n = 36) were stained by AO to assess the presence of single-stranded DNA. Two days after ICSI, the embryos of 135 patients were scored for morphology, fragmentation included. Embryos of 48 couples were cultured for 4 days to develop to the morula or blastocyst stage. At most 2 embryos were transferred on Day 2 or 4.

Results: When the level of spermatozoa with single-stranded DNA was increased, there was a significantly lower fertilization rate after ICSI. Besides, increased sperm single-stranded DNA resulted in a higher proportion of heavily fragmented embryos on Day 2 (P < 0.05). In patients with an increased level of spermatozoa with single-stranded DNA, a significantly higher number of embryos were arrested in spite of prolonged culturing (P < 0.05). Classical sperm parameters did not affect the quality and developmental potential of ICSI-derived embryos. No correlation was found between the level of spermatozoa with single-stranded DNA, pregnancy rate, and live-birth rate achieved by ICSI, except in patients with 0% of spermatozoa with single-stranded DNA, in whom the pregnancy rate was significantly higher.

Conclusions: Sperm single-stranded DNA provides additional data on sperm functional capacity in terms of fertilization and embryonic quality after ICSI.

Embryos human ICSI single-stranded DNA spermatozoa 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Evenson DP, Darzynkiewicz Z, Melamed MR: Relation of mammalian sperm chromatin heterogeneity to fertility. Science 1980;210:1131–1133Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tejada RI, Mitchell JC, Norman A, Marik JJ, Friedman S: A test for the practical evaluation of male fertility by acridine orange (AO) fluorescence. Fertil Steril 1984;42: 87–91Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chevaillier P, Mauro N, Feneux D, Jouannet P, David G: Anomalous protein complement of sperm nuclei in some infertile men. Lancet 1987;85:806–807Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dadoune JP, Mayaux MJ, Guilhard-Moscato ML: Correlation between defects in chromatin condensation of human spermatozoa detected by aniline blue and semen characteristics. Andrologia 1988;20:211–217Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Auger J, Mesbah M, Huber C, Dadoune JP: Aniline blue staining as a marker of sperm chromatin defects associated with different semen characteristics discriminates between proven fertile and suspected infertile men. Int J Androl 1990;13: 452–462Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sailer BL, Jost LK, Evenson DP: Mammalian spermDNAsusceptibility to in situ denaturation associated with the presence of DNA strand breaks as measured by the terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase assay. J Androl 1995;16:80–87Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Golan R, Schochat L, Weissenberg R, Soffer Y, Marcus Z, Oschry Y, Lewin LM: Evaluation of chromatin condensation in human spermatozoa: A flow cytometric assay using acridine orange staining. Mol Reprod Dev 1997;3:47–54Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sun JG, Jurisicova A, Casper RF: Detection of deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation in human sperm: Correlation with fertilization in vitro. Biol Reprod 1997;56:602–607Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lopes S, Sun JG, Jurisicova A, Meriano J, Casper RF: Sperm deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation is increased in poorquality semen samples and correlates with failed fertilization in intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril 1998;69: 528–532Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hammadeh ME, Stieber M, Haidl G, Schmidt W: Association between sperm cell chromatin condensation, morphology based on strict criteria, and fertilization, cleavage and pregnancy rates in an IVF program. Andrologia 1998;30:29–35Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Evenson DP: Alterations and damage of sperm chromatin structure and early embryonic development. In Towards Reproductive Certainty, R. Jansen, D Mortimer (eds), New York, Parthenon Pub Group, 1999, pp 313–329Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gopalkrishnan K, Hurkadli K, Padwal V, Balaiah D: Use of acridine orange to evaluate chromatin integrity of human spermatozoa in different groups in infertile men. Andrologia 1999;31:277–282Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Claassens OE, Menkveld R, Franken DR, Pretorius E, Swart Y, Lombard CJ, Kruger TF: The Acridine Orange test: Determining the relationship between sperm morphology and fertilization in vitro. Hum Reprod 1992;7:242–247Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liu DY, Baker HWG:Sperm nuclear chromatin normality: Relationship with sperm morphology, sperm-zona pellucida binding, and fertilization rates in vitro. Fertil Steril 1992;58: 1178–1184Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Liu DY, Baker HWG: A new test for the assessment of sperm- zona pellucida penetration: Relationship with results of other sperm tests and fertilization in vitro. Hum Reprod 1994;9: 489–496Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hoshi K, Katayose H, Yaganida K, Kimura Y, Sato A: The relationship between acridine orange fluorescence of sperm nuclei and the fertilizing ability of human sperm. Fertil Steril 1996;66:634–639Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ron-El R, Nachum H, Herman A, Golan A, Caspi E, Soffer E: Delayed fertilization and poor embryonic development associated with impaired semen quality. Fertil Steril 1991;55: 338–344Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chan SJV, Tucker MJ, Leung CKM, Leong MK: Association between human in vitro fertilization rate and pregnancy outcome: A possible involvement of spermatozoal quality in subsequent embryonic viability. Asia-Oceania J Obstet Gynaecol 1993;19:357–373Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Parinaud J, Mieusset R, Vieitez G, Labal B, Richoilley G: Influence of sperm parameters on embryo quality. Fertil Steril 1993;60:888–892Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Menezo Y, Dale B: Paternal contribution to successful embryogenesis. Hum Reprod 1995;10:1326–1328Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Janny L, Menezo YJR: Evidence for a strong paternal effect on human preimplantation embryo development and blastocyst formation. Mol Reprod Dev 1994;38:36–42Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Terriou P, Giorgeti C, Hans E: Injection intra-cytoplasmique et qualite embryonnaire: Comparaison avec la FIV utilisant un sperme de donneur. La tribune des CECOS 1997;9:3–5Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sakkas D, Urner F, Bizzaro D, Manicardi G, Bianchi PG, Shoukir Y, Campana A: Sperm nuclear DNA damage and altered chromatin structure: Effect on fertilization and embryo development. Hum Reprod 1998;13(Suppl 4):11–19Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Plachot M: Human preimplantation development. In Embryology and Genetics (Pre-congress Course on Embryology & Genetics), 15th Annual Meeting of the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology 1999, Tours, France, pp 9–13Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Skoukir J, Chardonnens D, Campana A, Sakkas D: Blastocyst development from supernumerary embryos after intracytoplasmic sperm injection:Apaternal influence? Hum Reprod 1998;13:1632–1637Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Griffiths TA, Murdoch A, Herbert M: Embryonic development in vitro is compromised by the ICSI procedure. Hum Reprod 2000;15:1592–1596Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dumoulin JC, Coonen E, Bras M, van Vissen LC, Ignoul-Vanvuchelen R, Bergers-Jansen JM, Derhaag JG, Geraedts JP, Evers JL: Comparison of in-vitro development of embryos originating from either conventional in-vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 2000;15:402–409Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Miller JE, Smith TT:The effect of intracytoplasmic sperm injection and semen parameters on blastocyst development in vitro. Hum Reprod 2001;16:918–924Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yang D, Shahata MA, al-Bader M, al-Natsha SA, al-Flamerzia M, al-Shawaf T: Intracytoplasmic sperm injection improving embryo quality: Comparison of the sibling oocytes of non-malefactor couples. J Assist Reprod Genet 1996;13:351–355Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Oehninger,Kruger TF, Simon T, Jones D, Mayer J, Lanzendorf S, Toner JP, Muasher SJ:Acomparative analysis of embryo implantation potential in patients with severe teratozoospermia undergoing in-vitro fertilization with a high insemination concentration or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 1996;11:1086–1089Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    World Health Organization: Laboratory Manual for Examination of Human Semen and Sperm-Cervical Mucus Interaction, 3rd edn, New York, Cambridge University Press, 1992Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Auger J, Eustache F, Ducot B, Gony B, Keskes L, Kolbezen M, Lamarte A, Lornage J, Nomal N, Pitaval G, Simon O, VirantKlun I, Spira A, Jouannet P: Intra-and inter-individual variability in human sperm concentration, motility and vitality assessment during a workshop involving ten laboratories. Hum Reprod 2000;15:2360–2368Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Palermo G, Joris H, Devroey P, van Steirteghem AC: Pregnancies after intracytoplasmic injection of a single spermatozoon into an oocyte. Lancet 1992;340:17–18Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Van Steirteghem AC, Nagy Z, Joris H, Liu J, Staessen C, Smitz J, Wisanto A, Devroey P: High fertilization and implantation rates after intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 1993;8:1061–1066Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Devroey P, Liu J, Nagy Z, Tournaye H, Silber SJ, van Steirteghem AC: Normal fertilization of human oocytes after testicular sperm extraction and ICSI. Fertil Steril 1994; 62: 639–641Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Devroey P, Liu J, Nagy Z, Goossens A, Tournaye H, Camus M, van Steirteghem AC, Silber S: Pregnancies after testicular sperm extraction and ICSI in non-obstructive azoospermia. Hum Reprod 1995;10:1457–1460Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Plachot M, Mandelbaum J, Junca AM:Morphologic, cytologic and cytogenetic studies of human embryos obtained by IVF. In In Vitro Fertilisation, SS Ratnam, ES Teon (eds), Lancs., UK, Parthenon Publishing Group, 1986, Vol2, pp 61–65. Proceedings of the 12th World Congress on Fertility and SterilityGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bolton VN, Hawes SM, Taylor CT, Parsons JH: Development of spare human preimplantation embryos in vitro: An analysis of the correlations among gross morphology, cleavage rates, and development to the blastocyst. J In Vitro Fertil Embryo Transfer 1989;6:30–35Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dawson KY, Conaghan J, Ostera GR, Winston RM, Hardy K: Delaying transfer to the third day post-insemination, to select non-arrested embryos, increases development to the fetal heart stage. Hum Reprod 1995;10:177–182Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Scott RT, Hofmann GE, Veeck LL, Jones HW, Muasher SJ: Embryo quality and pregnancy rates in patients attempting pregnancy through in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1991;55:426–428Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Jurisicova A, Varmuza S, Casper RF: Programmed cell death and human embryo fragmentation. Mol Hum Reprod 1996;2:93–98Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Yang HW, Hwang KJ, Kwon HC, Kim HS, Choi KW, Oh KS: Detection of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and apoptosis in human fragmented embryos. Hum Reprod 1998;13: 998–1002Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sakkas D, Urner F, Bianchi PG, Bizzaro D, Wagner I, Jaquenoud N, Manicardi G, Campana A: Sperm chromatin anomalies can influence decondensation after intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 1991;11:837–843Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Cummins JM, Jequier AM: Concerns and recommendations for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment. In Modern Andrology, W Ombelet, A Vereecken (eds), Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995, pp 138–143Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ibrahim M, Peterson H: Acridine orange fluorescence as male fertility test. Arch Androl 1988;20:125–130Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Evenson DP, Jost LK, Marshall D, Zinaman MJ, Clegg E, Purvis K, de Angelis P, Claussen OP: Utility of the sperm chromatin structure assay as a diagnostic and prognostic tool in the human fertility clinic. Hum Reprod 1999;14:1039–1049Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Larson KL, De Yonge CJ, Barnes AM, Jost LK, Evenson DP: Sperm chromatin structure assay parameters as predictors of failed pregnancy following assisted reproductive techniques. Hum Reprod 2000;15:1717–1722Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Colleu D, Lescoat D, Gouranton J:Nuclear maturity of human spermatozoa selected by swim-up or by Percoll gradient centrifugation procedures. Fertil Steril 1996;65: 160–164.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Angelopoulos T, Moshel YA, Lu L, Macanas E, Grifo JA, Krey LC: Simultaneous assessment of sperm chromatin condensation and morphology before and after separation procedures: Effect on the clinical outcome after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1998;69:740–747Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Irma Virant-Klun
    • 1
  • Tomaz Tomazevic
    • 1
  • Helena Meden-Vrtovec
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyMedical Centre LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations