Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Male age influences oocyte-donor program results

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

Abstract

Background

The purpose of our research was to examine the relationship between male age and semen parameters in a range of ages (from 20s to 60s) in Egg Donation Program (EDP) cycles. EDP provides a pool of high quality oocytes, thus allowing better analysis of the sperm efficacy.

Discussion

The retrospective study population consisted of 484 male partners of patients undergoing EDP in in-vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments. A comparison was made of male age and sperm parameters within two groups: cycles resulting in a pregnancy (pregnant group) and cycles which failed to achieve a pregnancy (non-pregnant group). The men involved in the pregnant group were found to be significantly younger 43.2 ± 8.1 than those of the non-pregnant group 46.8 ± 7.8 (p = 0.003). Analysis of sperm morphology revealed a significant prevalence of teratozoospermia in males of the non-pregnant group, as compared to the males of the pregnant group (29% vs. 11%, respectively). The results also demonstrate that sperm parameters are apparently not diminished until men reach the age of 40. However, between 40–50 years old semen parameters deteriorate. Male age was found to be related to a reduction in sperm strict criteria: 44.8 in normozoospermia, 47.9 (p = 0.02), 48.4 (p = 0.04) and 51.9 (p = 0.001) years old in mild teratozoospermia, moderate teratozoospermia and severe teratozoospermia, respectively. Additionally, the results showed that the percentage of “healthy” embryos on day 3 of embryo culture was lower in the non-pregnant group (26%), as compared with the pregnant group (34%; p = 0.01).

Conclusion

Our study confirms that sperm parameters are reduced by age and suggests that this age-dependent effect could be a reason for failures in IVF cycles even in EDP couples.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Joffe M, Li Z. Male and female factors in fertility. Am J Epidemiol 1994;140:921–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lansac J. Delayed parenting. Is delayed childbearing a good thing? Hum Reprod 1995;10:1033–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Ventura S, Martin J, Curtin S, Mathews T. Report of Final Natality Statistics, 1995. Monthly Vital Statistics Report. Vol. 45, no. 11, suppl. National enters for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD, 1997

  4. Kidd SA, Eskenazi B, Wyrobek AJ. Effects of male age on semen quality and fertility: a review of the literature. Fertil Steril 2001;75:237–48.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Schwartz D, Mayaux M-J, Spira A, Moscato M-L, Jouannet P, Czyglik F, et al. Semen characteristics as a function of age in 833 fertile men. Fertil Steril 1983;39:530–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Spandorfer SD, Avrech OM, Colombero LT, Palermo GD, Rosenwaks Z. Effect of paternal age on fertilization and pregnancy characteristics in couples treated by intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 1998;13:334–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. de La Rochebrochard E, Mouzon J, Thepot F, Thonneau P; FIVNAT. Fathers over 40 and increased failure to conceive: the lessons of in vitro fertilization in France. Fertil Steril 2006;85:1420–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. World Health Organization. WHO laboratory manual for the examination of human semen and semen-cervical mucus interaction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kruger TF, Acosta AA, Simmons KF, Swanson RJ, Matta JF, Veeck LL, Morshedi M, Brugo S. New method of evaluating sperm morphology with predictive value for human in vitro fertilization. Urology 1987;30:248–51.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Stolwijk AM, Zielhuis GA, Sauer MV, Hamilton CJ, Paulson RJ. The impact of the woman’s age on the success of standard and donor in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1997;67:702–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). Guidelines for gametes and embryo donation. A practice committee report. Guidelines and minimum standards, ASRM 1997

  12. Muasher SJ, Oehninger S, Simonetti S, Matta J, Ellis LM, Liu HC, et al. The value of basal and/or stimulated serum gonadotropin levels in prediction of stimulation response and in vitro fertilization outcome. Fertil Steril 1988;50:298–307.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Borini A, Violini F, Bianchi L, Bafalo MG, Trevisi MR, Flamigni C. Improvement of pregnancy and implantation rates in cyclic women undergoing oocyte donation after long-term down-regulation. Hum Reprod 1995;10:3018–21.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Paulson RJ, Hatch IE, Lobo RA, Sauer MV. Cumulative conception and live birth rates after oocyte donation: implications regarding endometrial receptivity. Hum Reprod 1997;12:835–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Yaunis JS, Simon A, Laufer N. Endometrial preparation: lessons from oocyte donation. Fertil Steril 1996;66:873–84.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Paulson RJ, Milligan RC, Sokol RZ. The lack of influence of age on male fertility. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;184:818–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kahraman S, Findikli N, Biricik A, Oncu N, Ogur C, Sertyel S, et al. Preliminary FISH studies on spermatozoa and embryos in patients with variable degree of teratozoospermia and history of poor prognosis. Reprod Biomed Online 2006;12(6):752–71.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Rosenbusch B, Sterzik K. Sperm chromosomes and habitual abortion. Fertil Steril 1991;56:370–2.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Enginsu ME, Dumoulin JC, Pieters MH, Bras M, Evers JL, Geraedts JP. Evaluation of human sperm morphology using strict criteria after Diff-Quik staining: correlation of morphology with fertilization in vitro. Hum Reprod 1991;6:854–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Host E, Ernst E, Lindenberg S, Smidt-Jensen S. Morphology of spermatozoa used in IVF and ICSI from oligozoospermic men. Reprod Biomed Online 2001;3:212–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. McKenzie LJ, Kovanci E, Amato P, Cisneros P, Lamb D, Carson SA. Pregnancy outcome of in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection with profound teratospermia. Fertil Steril 2004;82:847–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bianchi PG, Manicardi GC, Urner F, Campana A, Sakkas D. Chromatin packaging and morphology in ejaculated human spermatozoa: evidence of hidden anomalies in normal spermatozoa. Mol Hum Reprod 1996;2:139–44.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Martin H, Rademaker AW, Greene C, Ko E, Hoang T, Barclay L, Chernos J. A comparison of the frequency of sperm chromosome abnormalities in men with mild, moderate, and severe oligozoospermia. Biol Reprod 2003;69:535–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Benchaib M, Braun V, Lornage J, Hadj S, Salle B, Lejeune H, Guerin JF. Sperm DNA fragmentation decreases the pregnancy rate in an assisted reproductive technique. Hum Reprod 2003;18:1023–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Singh NP, Muller CH, Berger RE. DNA damage and apoptosis in human sperm. Fertil Steril 2003;80:1420–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Berkovitz A, Eltes F, Lederman H, Peer S, Ellenbogen A, Feldberg B, Bartoov B. How to improve IVF-ICSI outcome by sperm selection. Reprod Biomed Online 2006;5:634–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Jung A, Schuppe HC, Schill WB. Comparison of semen quality in older and younger men attending an Andrology clinic. Andrology 2002;34:116–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Dondero F, Mazzilli F, Giovenco P, Lenzi A, Cerasaro M. Fertility in older men. J Endocrinol Invest 1985;8:87–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Singer R, Sagiv M, Levinsky H, Allalouf D. Andrological parameters in men with high sperm counts and possible correlation with age. Arch Androl 1990;24:107–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Eskenazi B, Wyrobek AJ, Sloter E, Kidd SA, Moore L, Young S, et al. The association of age and semen quality in healthy men. Hum Reprod 2003;18:447–54.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Sauer MV. The impact of age on reproductive potential: lessons learned from oocyte donation. Maturitas 1998;30:221–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fertility Center, Assuta Medical Center, Rishon LeZion, 57653, Israel

    Eliezer Girsh, Nathan Katz, Leonid Genkin, Ofer Girtler, Jaron Bocker, Sofa Bezdin & Ilya Barr

  2. Department of Ob/Gyn, Hadassah University Medical Center, P.O. Box 12000, Ein Karem, 91120, Jerusalem, Israel

    Eliezer Girsh

Authors
  1. Eliezer Girsh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nathan Katz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Leonid Genkin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ofer Girtler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jaron Bocker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sofa Bezdin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ilya Barr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eliezer Girsh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Girsh, E., Katz, N., Genkin, L. et al. Male age influences oocyte-donor program results. J Assist Reprod Genet 25, 137–143 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-008-9215-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-008-9215-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation