Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of Cryopreserved Semen Quality and Timed Intrauterine Insemination on Pregnancy Rate and Gender of Offspring in a Donor Insemination Program

  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose: Our purpose was to study the relationship among cryopreserved donor semen quality, pregnancy rates, and preconception sex selection after intrauterine insemination.

Methods: We reviewed the records of the 203 women in our donor insemination program from 1987 to 1994 who became pregnant after more than one insemination cycle and had no female-factor infertility. They were categorized according to the number of cycles required for pregnancy. Semen samples from 54 donors were analyzed before freezing and after thawing. Specimens resulting in pregnancy were compared to specimens from the same donor that did not. Semen characteristics were compared to gender of the child.

Results: Two hundred fifty two-women became pregnant of the 422 who were enrolled. The pregnancy rate per cycle was 13%. Semen quality was not related to pregnancy outcome or offspring gender. However, more male children (101 vs 83) were born.

Conclusions: Semen characteristics in good-quality cryopreserved donor semen do not affect pregnancy rate or offspring gender.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Gerber WL, Bresaw LS: Semen abnormalities in artificial insemination donor candidates. J Urol 1983;130:266–268

    Google Scholar 

  2. Nachtigall RD: Donor insemination and human immunodeficiency virus: A risk/benefit analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994;170:1692–1696

    Google Scholar 

  3. Schover LR, Thomas AJ, Miller KF, Falcone T, Goldberg J: Preferences for intracytoplasmic sperm injection versus donor insemination in severe male factor infertility: A preliminary report. Hum Reprod 1996;11:2461–2464

    Google Scholar 

  4. Vogt PH: Genetic aspects of artificial fertilization. Hum Reprod 1995;10:128–137

    Google Scholar 

  5. Carson SA: Sex selection: The ultimate in family planning. Fertil Steril 1988;50:16–19

    Google Scholar 

  6. Zarutskie PW, Muller CH, Magone M, Soules MR: The clinical relevance of sex selection techniques. Fertil Steril 1989;52:891–905

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wilcox AJ, Weinberg CR, Baird DD: Timing of sexual intercourse in relation to ovulation-effects on the probability of conception, survival of pregnancy, and sex of the baby. N. Engl J Med 1995;333:1517–1521

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gray RH: Natural family planning and sex selection: fact or fiction? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991;165:1982–1994

    Google Scholar 

  9. Perez A, Eger R, Domenichini V, Kambic R, Gray RH: Sex ratio associated with natural family planning. Fertil Steril 1985;43:152–153

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ericsson RJ: Sex selection via albumin columns: 20 years of results. Hum Reprod 1994;9:1787–1788

    Google Scholar 

  11. New guidelines for the use of semen donor insemination: at1986. The American Fertility Society. Fertil Sertil 1986;46:93S–101S

    Google Scholar 

  12. World Health Organization: WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination of Human Semen and Sperm-Cervical Mucus Interaction, 3rd ed. New York, Cambridge University Press, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sharma RK, Tolentino MV, Agarwal A: Sperm kinematics of cryopreserved normozoospermic specimens after artificial stimulation. Urology 1996;47:77–81

    Google Scholar 

  14. Milligan MP, Harris S, Dennis KJ: Comparison of sperm velocity in fertile and infertile groups as measured by time lapse photography. Fertil Steril 1980;34:509–511

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kjaergaard N, Mortensen BB, Hostrup P, Lauritsen JG: Prognostic value of semen analysis in infertility evaluation (male fertility/life-table analysis). Andrologia 1990;22:62–68

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bordson BL, Ricci E, Dickey RP, Dunaway H, Taylor SN, Curole DN: Comparison of fecundability with fresh and frozen semen in therapeutic donor insemination. Fertil Steril 1986;46:466–469

    Google Scholar 

  17. Brown CA, Boone WR, Shapiro SS: Improved cryopreserved semen fecundability in an alternating fresh-frozen artificial insemination program. Fertil Steril 1988;50:825–827

    Google Scholar 

  18. Richter MA, Haning RV, Jr, Saphiro SS: Artificial donor insemination: Fresh versus frozen sperm, the patient as her own control. Fertil Steril 1984;41:277–280

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hammond MG, Jordan S, Sloan CS: Factors affecting pregnancy rates in a donor insemination program using frozen semen. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986;155:480–485

    Google Scholar 

  20. DiMarzo SJ, Huang J, Kennedy JF, Villanueva B, Herbert SA, Young PE: Pregnancy rates with fresh versus computer-controlled cryopreserved semen for artificial insemination by donor in a private practice setting. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990;162:1483–1490

    Google Scholar 

  21. Patton PE, Burry KA, Thurmond A, Novy MJ, Wolf DP: Intrauterine insemination outperforms intracervical insemination in a randomized, controlled study with frozen, donor semen. Fertil Steril 1992;57:559–564

    Google Scholar 

  22. Pistorius LR, Kruger TF, Villers A De, Merwe JP: A comparative study using prepared and unprepared frozen semen for donor insemination. Arch Androl 1996;36:81–86

    Google Scholar 

  23. Byrd W, Bradshaw K, Carr B, Edman C, Odom J, Ackerman G: A prospective randomized study of pregnancy rates following intrauterine and intracervical insemination using frozen donor sperm. Fertil Steril 1990;53:521–527

    Google Scholar 

  24. David G, Czglick F, Mayaux MJ, Schwarz D: The success of AID and semen characteristics study on 1489 cycles and 192 ejaculates. Int J Androl 1980;3:613–619

    Google Scholar 

  25. Marshburn PB, McIntire D, Carr BR, Byrd W: Spermatozoal characteristics from fresh and frozen donor semen and their correlation with fertility outcome after intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril 1992;58:179–186

    Google Scholar 

  26. Dodson WC, Haney AF: Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and intrauterine insemination for treatment of infertility. Fertil Steril 1991;55:457–467

    Google Scholar 

  27. Smith KD, Rodriguez-Rigau LJ, Steinberger E: The influence of ovulatory dysfunction and timing of insemination on the success of artificial donor (AID) with fresh or cryopreserved semen. Fertil Steril 1981;36:496–502

    Google Scholar 

  28. Centola GM: Effect of cryopreservation on human sperm motility. Mol. Androl 1989;1:399–402

    Google Scholar 

  29. Matorras R, Gorostiaga A, Diez J, Corcostegui B, Pijoan JI, Ramon O, Rodriguez-Escudero FJ: Intrauterine insemination with frozen sperm increases pregnancy rates in donor insemination cycles under gonadotropin stimulation. Fertil Steril 1996;65:620–625

    Google Scholar 

  30. Steinberger E, Smith KD: Artificial insemination with fresh or frozen semen: a comparative study. JAMA 1973;223:776–783

    Google Scholar 

  31. Chung PK, Verkauf BS, Mola R, Skinner L, Eichberg RD, Maroulis GB: Correlation between semen parameters of electroejaculates and achieving pregnancy by intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril 1997;7:129–132

    Google Scholar 

  32. Shelden R, Kemmann E, Bohrer M, Pasquale S: Multiple gestation is associated with the use of high numbers in the intrauterine insemination specimen in women undergoing gonadotropin stimulation. Fertil Steril 1988;49:607–610

    Google Scholar 

  33. Byrd W, Drobnis E, Kutteh WH, Marshburn P, Carr BR: Intrauterine insemination with frozen donor sperm: a prospective randomized trial comparing three different sperm preparation techniques. Fertil Steril 1994;62:850–856

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kang BM, Wu T-CJ: Effect of age on intrauterine insemination with frozen donor sperm. Obstet Gynecol 1996;88:93–98

    Google Scholar 

  35. Hurd WW, Randolph JF, Ansbacher R, Menge AC, Ohl DA, Brown AN: Comparison of intracervical, intrauterine, and intratubal techniques for donor insemination. Fertil Steril 1993;59:339–342

    Google Scholar 

  36. Dickey RP, Taylor SN, Curole DN, Rye PH: Male birth rates are influenced by the insemination of unselected spermatozoa and not by clomiphine citrate. Hum Reprod 1995;10:761–762

    Google Scholar 

  37. Simpson JL: Pregnancy and timing of intercourse. N Engl J Med 1995;333:1563–1565

    Google Scholar 

  38. France JT, Graham FM, Gosling L, Hair P, Knox BS: Characteristics of natural conceptual cycles occurring in a prospective study of sex preselection: fertility awareness symptoms, hormone levels, sperm survival and pregnancy outcome. Int J Fertil 1992;37:244–255

    Google Scholar 

  39. Shushan A, Schenker JG: Prenatal sex determination and selection. Hum Reprod 1993;8:1545–1549

    Google Scholar 

  40. Reubinoff BE, Schenker JG: New advances in sex preselection. Fertil Steril 1996;66:343–350

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, A-100, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Andrology Research and Clinical Laboratories, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio, 44195

    R. S. Sidhu, R. K. Sharma & A. Agarwal

Authors
  1. R. S. Sidhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. K. Sharma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Agarwal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sidhu, R.S., Sharma, R.K. & Agarwal, A. Effects of Cryopreserved Semen Quality and Timed Intrauterine Insemination on Pregnancy Rate and Gender of Offspring in a Donor Insemination Program. J Assist Reprod Genet 14, 531–537 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021131511209

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021131511209

Search

Navigation