Sperm Chromatin and ART (IUI, IVF and ICSI) Pregnancy

Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

Diagnosis of male infertility has been based mainly on the traditional semen parameters, namely, concentration, motility and morphology. In assisted reproductive technologies (ART), sperm samples are prepared by methods such as swim-up or density-gradient centrifugation to sort out sperm populations believed to have the highest fertilization potential. Traditionally, results of semen analysis and sperm preparation have been the fundaments on which clinicians could base their decision of what ART method should be used for a given couple. It has, however, become apparent that none of these procedures are sufficient for the determination of male fertility capacity. Owing to the lack of adequate methods to evaluate the fertility potential of a couple, the choice of ART method is made more or less blindly. A continuous search for better markers of male fertility has led to an increased focus on sperm chromatin integrity testing in fertility workup and ART. Numerous sperm DNA integrity tests have been developed. In the context of fertility, the comet, TUNEL, and Sperm Chromatin Structure assays are the most frequently used. Sperm DNA fragmentation has shown to be an independent predictor of success in couples undergoing intrauterine insemination. More contrasting data exist regarding the role of sperm DNA fragmentation in relation to fertilization, pre-embryo development and pregnancy outcome in in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).

Keywords

Male infertility Assisted reproductive technology Intracytoplasmic sperm injection Intrauterine insemination In vitro fertilization 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    De Kretser DM. Male infertility. Lancet. 1997;349:787–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dunson DB, Baird DD, Colombo B. Increased infertility with age in men and women. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103:51–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Palermo G, Joris H, Devroey P, Van Steirteghem AC. Pregnancies after intracytoplasmic injection of single spermatozoon into an oocyte. Lancet. 1992;340:17–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Andersen AN, Goossens V, Ferraretti AP, Bhattacharya S, Felberbaum R, de Mouzon J, et al. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2004: results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:756–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Andersen AN, Gianaroli L, Felberbaum R, de Mouzon J, Nygren KG. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2001. Results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:1158–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Auger J, Eustache F, Andersen AG, Irvine DS, Jorgensen N, Skakkebaek NE, et al. Sperm morphological defects related to environment, lifestyle and medical history of 1001 male partners of pregnant women from four European cities. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:2710–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bonde JPE, Ernst E, Jensen TK, Hjollund NHI, Kolstad H, Henriksen TB, et al. Relation between semen quality and fertility: a population-based study of 430 first-pregnancy planners. Lancet. 1998;352:1172–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Guzick DS, Overstreet JW, Factor-Litvak P, Brazil CK, Nakajima ST, Coutifaris C, et al. Sperm morphology, motility, and concentration in fertile and infertile men. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:1388–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Agarwal A, Said TM. Role of sperm chromatin abnormalities and DNA damage in male infertility. Hum Reprod Update. 2003;9:331–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Erenpreiss J, Spanó M, Erenpreisa J, Bungum M, Giwercman A. Sperm chromatin structure and male fertility: biological and clinical aspects. Asian J Androl. 2006;8:11–29.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Edwards RG, Brody SA. Principles and practice of assisted human reproduction. Philadelphia: W.B Saunders; 1995.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Steptoe PC, Edwards RG. Birth after the reimplantation of a human embryo. Lancet. 1978;2:366.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zegers-Hochschild F, Nygren KG, Adamson GD, de Mouzon J, Lancaster P, Mansour R, et al. The International Committee Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ICMART) glossary on ART terminology. Fertil Steril. 2006;86:16–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dobson R. Number of babies born by assisted reproduction rises by 12%. BMJ. 2009;338:2208.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hull MG, Fleming CF, Hughes AO, McDermott A. The age-related decline in female fecundity: a ­quantitative controlled study of implanting capacity and survival of individual embryos after in vitro ­fertilization. Fertil Steril. 1996;65:783–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Aitken RJ. Sperm function tests and fertility. Int J Androl. 2006;29:69–75; discussion 105–8.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Muller CH. Rationale, interpretation, validation, and uses of sperm function tests. J Androl. 2000;21:10–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bhattacharya S, Hamilton MP, Shaaban M, Khalaf Y, Seddler M, Ghobara T, et al. Conventional in-vitro fertilisation versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection for the treatment of non-male-factor infertility: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2001;357:2075–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jain T, Gupta RS. Trends in the use of intracytoplasmic sperm injection in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:251–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Evenson DP, Jost LK, Marshall D, Zinaman MJ, Clegg E, Purvis K, et al. Utility of the sperm chromatin structure assay as a diagnostic and prognostic tool in the human fertility clinic. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:1039–49.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gandini L, Lombardo F, Paoli D, Caponecchia L, Familiari G, Verlengia C, et al. Study of apoptotic DNA fragmentation in human spermatozoa. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:830–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Host E, Lindenberg S, Smidt-Jensen S. The role of DNA strand breaks in human spermatozoa used for IVF and ICSI. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2000;79:559–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Irvine DS, Twigg JP, Gordon EL, Fulton N, Milne PA, Aitken RJ. DNA integrity in human spermatozoa: relationships with semen quality. J Androl. 2000;21:33–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Spanò M, Bonde JP, Hjøllund HI, Kolstad HA, Cordelli E, Leter G. Sperm chromatin damage impairs human fertility. The Danish First Pregnancy Planner Study Team. Fertil Steril. 2000;73:43–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Carrell DT, Liu L. Altered protamine 2 expression is uncommon in donors of known fertility, but common among men with poor fertilizing capacity, and may reflect other abnormalities of spermiogenesis. J Androl. 2001;22:604–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zini A, Bielecki R, Phang D, Zenzes MT. Correlations between two markers of sperm DNA integrity, DNA denaturation and DNA fragmentation, in fertile and infertile men. Fertil Steril. 2001;75:674–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zini A, Fischer MA, Sharir S, Shayegan B, Phang D, Jarvi K. Prevalence of abnormal sperm DNA denaturation in fertile and infertile men. Urology. 2002;60:1069–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Saleh RA, Agarwal A, Nada EA, El-Tonsy MH, Sharma RK, Meyer A, et al. Negative effects of increased sperm DNA damage in relation to seminal oxidative stress in men with idiopathic and male factor infertility. Fertil Steril. 2003;79 Suppl 3:1597–605.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Morris ID, Ilott S, Dixon L, Brison DR. The spectrum of DNA damage in human sperm assessed by single cell gel electrophoresis (Comet assay) and its relationship to fertilization and embryo development. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:990–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gorczyca W, Gong J, Darzynkiewicz Z. Detection of DNA strand breaks in individual apoptotic cells by the in situ terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase and nick translation assays. Cancer Res. 1993;53:1945–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Evenson DP, Darzynkiewicz Z, Melamed MR. Relation of mammalian sperm chromatin heterogeneity to fertility. Science. 1980;210:1131–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Evenson DP, Larson KL, Jost LK. Sperm chromatin structure assay: its clinical use for detecting sperm DNA fragmentation in male infertility and comparisons with other techniques. J Androl. 2002;23:25–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Fernandez JL, Muriel L, Rivero MT, Goyanes V, Vazquez R, Alvarez JG. The sperm chromatin dispersion test: a simple method for the determination of sperm DNA fragmentation. J Androl. 2003;24:59–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fernández JL, Muriel L, Goyanes V, Segrelles E, Gosálvez J, Enciso M, et al. Simple determination of human sperm DNA fragmentation with an improved sperm chromatin dispersion test. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:833–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Aravindan GR, Bjordahl J, Jost LK, Evenson DP. Susceptibility of human sperm to in situ DNA denaturation is strongly correlated with DNA strand breaks identified by single-cell electrophoresis. Exp Cell Res. 1997;236:231–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Erenpreiss J, Jepson K, Giwercman A, Tsarev I, Erenpreisa J, Spanó M. Toluidine blue cytometry test for sperm DNA conformation: comparison with the flow cytometric sperm chromatin structure and TUNEL assays. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:2277–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Makhlouf AA, Niederberger C. DNA integrity tests in clinical practice: it is not a simple matter of black and white (or red and green). J Androl. 2006;27:316–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bungum M, Humaidan P, Axmon A, Spanó M, Bungum L, Erenpreiss J, et al. Sperm DNA integrity assessment in prediction of assisted reproduction technology outcome. Hum Reprod. 2007;22:174–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Spanò M, Kolstad AH, Larsen SB, Cordelli E, Leter G, Giwercman A, et al. The applicability of the flow cytometric sperm chromatin structure assay in epidemiological studies. Asclepios. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:2495–505.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Giwercman A, Richthoff J, Hjollund H, Bonde JP, Jepson K, Frohm B, et al. Correlation between sperm motility and sperm chromatin structure assay parameters. Fertil Steril. 2003;80:1404–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Giwercman A, Lindstedt L, Larsson M, Bungum M, Spanó M, Levine RJ, et al. Sperm chromatin ­structure assay as an independent predictor of fertility in vivo: a case-control study. Int J Androl. 2010;33:221–7.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Erenpreiss J, Elzanaty S, Giwercman A. Sperm DNA damage in men from infertile couples. Asian J Androl. 2008;10:786–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Duran EH, Morshedi M, Taylor S, Oehninger S. Sperm DNA quality predicts intrauterine insemination outcome: a prospective cohort study. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:3122–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Boe-Hansen GB, Fedder J, Ersboll AK, Christensen P. The sperm chromatin structure assay as a diagnostic tool in the human fertility clinic. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:1576–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Muriel L, Meseguer M, Fernandez JL, Alvarez J, Remohi J, Pellicer A, et al. Value of the sperm chromatin dispersion test in predicting pregnancy outcome in intrauterine insemination: a blind prospective study. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:738–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Larson KL, DeJonge CJ, Barnes AM, Jost LK, Evenson DP. Sperm chromatin structure assay parameters as predictors of failed pregnancy following assisted reproductive techniques. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:1717–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Larson-Cook KL, Brannian JD, Hansen KA, Kasperson KM, Aamold ET, Evenson DP. Relationship between the outcomes of assisted reproductive techniques and sperm DNA fragmentation as measured by the sperm chromatin structure assay. Fertil Steril. 2003;80:895–902.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Bungum M, Humaidan P, Spanó M, Jepson K, Bungum L, Giwercman A. The predictive value of sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA) parameters for the outcome of intrauterine insemination, IVF and ICSI. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:1401–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Gandini L, Lombardo F, Paoli D, Caruso F, Eleuteri P, Leter G, et al. Full-term pregnancies achieved with ICSI despite high levels of sperm chromatin damage. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:1409–17.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Virro MR, Larson-Cook KL, Evenson DP. Sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA) parameters are related to fertilization, blastocyst development, and ongoing pregnancy in in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles. Fertil Steril. 2004;81:1289–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    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;30:29–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Payne JF, Raburn DJ, Couchman GM, Price TM, Jamison MG, Walmer DK. Redefining the relationship between sperm deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation as measured by the sperm chromatin structure assay and outcomes of assisted reproductive techniques. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:356–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Aitken RJ, DeIuliis GN. Value of DNA integrity assays for fertility evaluation. Soc Reprod Fertil Suppl. 2007;65:81–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    The Practice Committee of the American Society of Reproductive Medicine. The clinical utility of sperm DNA integrity testing. Fertil Steril. 2006;86 Suppl 4:35–7.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Collins JA, Barnhart KT, Schlegel PN. Do sperm DNA integrity tests predict pregnancy with in vitro fertilization? Fertil Steril. 2008;89:823–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Zini A, Boman JM, Belzile E, Ciampi A. Sperm DNA damage is associated with an increased risk of pregnancy loss after IVF and ICSI: systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:2663–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Evenson DP, Wixon R. Meta-analysis of sperm DNA fragmentation using the sperm chromatin structure assay. Reprod Biomed Online. 2006;12:466–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Li Z, Wang L, Cai J, Huang H. Correlation of sperm DNA damage with IVF and ICSI outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2006;23:367–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ahmadi A, Ng SC. Fertilizing ability of DNA-damaged spermatozoa. J Exp Zool. 1999;284:696–704.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Sakkas D, Urner F, Bianchi PG, Bizzaro D, Wagner I, Jaquenoud N, et al. Sperm chromatin anomalies can influence decondensation after intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:837–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Tomlinson MJ, Moffatt O, Manicardi GC, Bizzaro D, Afnan M, Sakkas D. Interrelationships between seminal parameters and sperm nuclear DNA damage before and after density gradient centrifugation: implications for assisted conception. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:2160–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Tomsu M, Sharma V, Miller D. Embryo quality and IVF treatment outcomes may correlate with different sperm comet assay parameters. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:1856–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Henkel R, Kierspel E, Hajimohammad M, Stalf T, Hoogendijk C, Mehnert C, et al. DNA fragmentation of spermatozoa and assisted reproduction technology. Reprod Biomed Online. 2003;7:477–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Lewis SE, O’Connell M, Stevenson M, Thompson-Cree L, McClure N. An algorithm to predict pregnancy in assisted reproduction. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:1385–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Huang CC, Lin DP, Tsao HM, Cheng TC, Liu CH, Lee MS. Sperm DNA fragmentation negatively ­correlates with velocity and fertilization rates but might not affect pregnancy rates. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:130–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Nasr-Esfahani MH, Salehi M, Razavi S, Anjomshoa M, Rozbahani S, Moulavi F, et al. Effect of sperm DNA damage and sperm protamine deficiency on fertilization and embryo development post-ICSI. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005;11:198–205.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Sun JG, Jurisicova A, Casper RF. Detection of deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation in human sperm: correlation with fertilization in vitro. Biol Reprod. 1997;56:602–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Lopes CH, Mazzini MN, Tortorella H, Konrath RA, Brandelli A. Isolation, partial characterization and biological activity of mannosyl glycopeptides from seminal plasma. Glycoconj J. 1998;15:477–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Lewis SE, Aitken RJ. DNA damage to spermatozoa has impacts on fertilization and pregnancy. Cell Tissue Res. 2005;322:33–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Aitken RJ, Baker MA. Oxidative stress and male reproductive biology. Reprod Fertil Dev. 2004;16:581–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Liu CH, Tsao HM, Cheng TC, Wu HM, Huang CC, Chen CI, et al. DNA fragmentation, mitochondrial dysfunction and chromosomal aneuploidy in the spermatozoa of oligoasthenoteratozoospermic males. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2004;21:119–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Matsuda Y, Tobari I. Chromosomal analysis in mouse eggs fertilized in vitro with sperm exposed to ultraviolet light (UV) and methyl and ethyl methanesulfonate (MMS and EMS). Mutat Res. 1988;198:131–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Ahmadi A, Ng SC. Developmental capacity of damaged spermatozoa. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:2279–85.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Gandini L, Lombardo F, Lenzi A, Spano M, Dondero F. Cryopreservation and sperm DNA integrity. Cell Tissue Bank. 2006;7:91–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Seli E, Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB, Moffatt O, Sakkas D. Extent of nuclear DNA damage in ejaculated spermatozoa impacts on blastocyst development after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2004;82:378–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Golan R, Cooper TG, Oschry Y, Oberpenning F, Schulze H, Shocha L, et al. Changes in chromatin condensation of human spermatozoa during epididymal transit as determined by flow cytometry. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:1457–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Larson KL, Brannian JD, Timm BK, Jost LK, Evenson DP. Density gradient centrifugation and glass wool filtration of semen remove spermatozoa with damaged chromatin structure. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:2015–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Donnelly ET, O’Connell M, McClure N, Lewis SE. Differences in nuclear DNA fragmentation and mitochondrial integrity of semen and prepared human spermatozoa. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:1552–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Younglai EV, Holt D, Brown P, Jurisicova A, Casper RF. Sperm swim-up techniques and DNA fragmentation. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:1950–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    McVicar CM, McClure N, Williamson K, Dalzell LH, Lewis SE. Incidence of Fas positivity and deoxyribonucleic acid double-stranded breaks in human ejaculated sperm. Fertil Steril. 2004;81 Suppl 1:767–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Morrell JM, Moffatt O, Sakkas D, Manicardi GC, Bizzaro D, Tomlinson M, et al. Reduced senescence and retained nuclear DNA integrity in human spermatozoa prepared by density gradient centrifugation. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2004;21:217–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Bungum M, Spanó M, Humaidan P, Eleuteri P, Rescia M, Giwercman A. Sperm Chromatin Structure Assay (SCSA) parameters measured after density gradient centrifugation are not predictive for the outcome of ART. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:4–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Zini A, Mak V, Phang D, Jarvi K. Potential adverse effect of semen processing on human sperm deoxyribonucleic acid integrity. Fertil Steril. 1999;72:496–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Zini A, Finelli A, Phang D, Jarvi K. Influence of semen processing technique on human sperm DNA integrity. Urology. 2000;56:1081–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Benchaib M, Braun V, Lornage J, Hadj S, Salle B, Lejeune H, et al. Sperm DNA fragmentation decreases the pregnancy rate in an assisted reproductive technique. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:1023–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Benchaib M, Lornage J, Mazoyer C, Lejeune H, Salle B, Francois Guerin J. Sperm deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation as a prognostic indicator of assisted reproductive technology outcome. Fertil Steril. 2007;87:93–100.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Hammadeh ME, Radwan M, Al-Hasani S, Micu R, Rosenbaum P, Lorenz M, et al. Comparison of reactive oxygen species concentration in seminal plasma and semen parameters in partners of pregnant and non-pregnant patients after IVF/ICSI. Reprod Biomed Online. 2006;13:696–706.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Borini A, Tarozzi N, Bizzaro D, Bonu MA, Fava L, Flamigni C, et al. Sperm DNA fragmentation: paternal effect on early post-implantation embryo development in ART. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:2876–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Hamamah S, Magnoux E, Royere D, Barthelemy C, Dacheux JL, Gatti JL. Internal pH of human spermatozoa: effects of ions, follicular fluid and progesterone. Mol Hum Reprod. 1996;2:219–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Hamamah S, Gatti JL. Role of the ionic environment and internal pH on sperm activity. Hum Reprod. 1998;13 Suppl 4:20–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Peer S, Eltes F, Berkovitz A, Yehuda R, Itsykson P, Bartoov B. Is fine morphology of the human sperm nuclei affected by in vitro incubation at 37 degrees C? Fertil Steril. 2007;88:1589–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Dalzell LH, Thompson-Cree ME, McClure N, Traub AI, Lewis SE. Effects of 24-hour incubation after freeze-thawing on DNA fragmentation of testicular sperm from infertile and fertile men. Fertil Steril. 2003;79 Suppl 3:1670–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Dalzell JA, McVicar CM, McClure N, Lutton D, Lewis S. Effects of short and long incubations on DNA fragmentation of testicular sperm. Fertil Steril. 2004;82:1443–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Steele EK, McClure N, Maxwell RJ, Lewis SE. A comparison of DNA damage in testicular and proximal epididymal spermatozoa in obstructive azoospermia. Mol Hum Reprod. 1999;5:831–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Greco E, Scarselli F, Iacobelli M, Rienzi L, Ubaldi F, Ferrero S, et al. Efficient treatment of infertility due to sperm DNA damage by ICSI with testicular ­spermatozoa. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:226–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Aitken RJ, De Iuliis GN, McLachlan RI. Biological and clinical significance of DNA damage in the male germ line. Int J Androl. 2009;32:46–56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Ahmad L, Jalali S, Shami SA, Akram Z, Batool S, Kalsoom O. Effects of cryopreservation on sperm DNA integrity in normospermic and four categories of infertile males. Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2010;56:74–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Baumber J, Ball BA, Linfor JJ, Meyers SA. Reactive oxygen species and cryopreservation promote DNA fragmentation in equine spermatozoa. J Androl. 2003;24:621–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Taylor K, Roberts P, Sanders K, Burton P. Effect of antioxidant supplementation of cryopreservation medium on post-thaw integrity of human spermatozoa. Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;18:184–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Jorgensen N, Auger J, Giwercman A, Irvine DS, Jensen TK, Keiding N, et al. Semen analysis performed by different laboratory teams: an intervariation study. Int J Androl. 1997;20:201–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Evenson DP, Jost LK, Baer RK, Turner TW, Schrader SM. Individuality of DNA denaturation patterns in human sperm as measured by the sperm chromatin structure assay. Reprod Toxicol. 1991;5:115–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Erenpreiss J, Bungum M, Spanó M, Elzanaty S, Orbidans J, Giwercman A. Intra-individual variation in Sperm Chromatin Structure Assay parameters in men from infertile couples: clinical implications. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:2061–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Sakkas D, Alvarez JG. Sperm DNA fragmentation: mechanisms of origin, impact on reproductive outcome and analysis. Fertil Steril. 2010;93:1027–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Lewis SE, Agbaje IM. Using the alkaline comet assay in prognostic tests for male infertility and assisted reproductive technology outcomes. Mutagenesis. 2008;23:163–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Kefer JC, Agarwal A, Sabanegh E. Role of antioxidants in the treatment of male infertility. Int J Urol. 2009;16:449–57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Silver EW, Eskenazi B, Evenson DP, Block G, Young S, Wyrobek AJ. Effect of antioxidant intake on sperm chromatin stability in healthy nonsmoking men. J Androl. 2005;26:550–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Song GJ, Norkus EP, Lewis V. Relationship between seminal ascorbic acid and sperm DNA integrity in infertile men. Int J Androl. 2006;29:569–75.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Ménézo YJ, Hazout A, Panteix G, Robert F, Rollet J, Cohen-Bacrie P, et al. Antioxidants to reduce sperm DNA fragmentation: an unexpected adverse effect. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;14:418–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Moskovtsev SI, Lecker I, Mullen JB, Jarvi K, Willis J, White J, et al. Cause-specific treatment in patients with high sperm DNA damage resulted in significant DNA improvement. Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2009;55:109–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Greco E, Iacobelli M, Rienzi L, Ubaldi F, Ferrero S, Tesarik J. Reduction of the incidence of sperm DNA fragmentation by oral antioxidant treatment. J Androl. 2005;26:349–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Bartoov B, Berkovitz A, Eltes F. Selection of spermatozoa with normal nuclei to improve the pregnancy rate with intracytoplasmic sperm injection. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:1067–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Itzkan I, Qiu L, Fang H, Zaman MM, Vitkin E, Ghiran IC, et al. Confocal light absorption and scattering spectroscopic microscopy monitors organelles in live cells with no exogenous labels. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007;104:17255–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Said TM, Grunewald S, Paasch U, Glander HJ, Baumann T, Kriegel C, et al. Advantage of combining magnetic cell separation with sperm preparation techniques. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005;10:740–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Fernández-Gonzalez R, Moreira PN, Pérez-Crespo M, Sánchez-Martín M, Ramirez MA, Pericuesta E, et al. Long-term effects of mouse intracytoplasmic sperm injection with DNA-fragmented sperm on health and behavior of adult offspring. Biol Reprod. 2008;78:761–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    World Health Organization. WHO laboratory ­manual for the examination of human semen and sperm-cervical mucus interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999.Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Caglar GS, Köster F, Schöpper B, Asimakopoulos B, Nehls B, Nikolettos N, et al. Semen DNA fragmentation index, evaluated with both TUNEL and Comet assay, and the ICSI outcome. In Vivo. 2007;21:1075–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Check JH, Graziano V, Cohen R, Krotec J, Check ML. Effect of an abnormal sperm chromatin structural assay (SCSA) on pregnancy outcome following (IVF) with ICSI in previous IVF failures. Arch Androl. 2005;51:121–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Henkel R, Hajimohammad M, Stalf T, Hoogendijk C, Mehnert C, Menkveld R, et al. Influence of ­deoxyribonucleic acid damage on fertilization and pregnancy. Fertil Steril. 2004;81:965–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Bakos HW, Thompson JG, Feil D, Lane M. Sperm DNA damage is associated with assisted reproductive technology pregnancy. Int J Androl. 2008;31:518–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Frydman N, Prisant N, Hesters L, Frydman R, Tachdjian G, Cohen-Bacrie P, et al. Adequate ovarian follicular status does not prevent the decrease in pregnancy rates associated with high sperm DNA fragmentation. Fertil Steril. 2008;89:92–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Tarozzi N, Nadalini M, Stronati A, Bizzaro D, Dal Prato L, Coticchio G, et al. Anomalies in sperm chromatin packaging: implications for assisted reproduction techniques. Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;18:486–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Velez de la Calle JF, Muller A, Walschaerts M, Clavere JL, Jimenez C, Wittemer C, et al. Sperm deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation as assessed by the sperm chromatin dispersion test in assisted reproductive technology programs: results of a large ­prospective multicenter study. Fertil Steril. 2008;90:1792–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Tavalaee M, Razavi S, Nasr-Esfahani MH. Influence of sperm chromatin anomalies on assisted reproductive technology outcome. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:1119–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Reproductive Medicine CentreSkåne University Hospital Malmö, Lund UniversityMalmöSweden

Personalised recommendations