4.4 Article

Concordance of Ureaplasma urealyticum and Mycoplasma hominis in Infertile Couples: Impact on Semen Parameters

Journal

UROLOGY
Volume 81, Issue 6, Pages 1219-1224

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.02.044

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE To assess the relationship between mycoplasma infection and human infertility, we determined the concordance of Ureaplasma urealyticum (UU) and Mycoplasma hominis (MH) detection in infertile and fertile couples, and assessed semen parameters in both groups. METHODS Fifty infertile couples without a female factor attending a fertility clinic and 48 fertile couples were randomly screened for UU and MH. The concordance between partners was compared between the fertile and infertile groups. Semen and endocervical specimens were evaluated using the commercially available Mycofast Evolution2 test. RESULTS UU was detected in 24 semen specimens (48%) from the infertile men, in 12 specimens from fertile men (25%), in 20 endocervical specimens from infertile women (40%), and 11 from fertile women (22.9%). UU was detected higher in infertile men than in fertile men (P = .022). The concordance of UU was higher in infertile couples (32%) than in fertile couples (12.5%, P.022). The concordance of MH between male and female partners in the 2 groups did not differ significantly. The mean values of total motility, progressive motility, normal morphology, vitality, and total motile sperm count were significantly lower in sperm from infertile men than from fertile men. Progressive motility and vitality were significantly lower in UU-positive men than in men without UU, and low total motility and total motile sperm count were significantly related to the presence of MH. CONCLUSION Clinicians should consider the roles of UU and MH in infertility and routinely screen infertile couples for the presence of these mycoplasma species. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available