4.3 Article

Analysis of 508 infertile male patients in south-western Finland in 1980-2000:: hormonal status and factors predisposing to immunological infertility

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/S0301-2115(03)00312-9

Keywords

male; infertility; sperm antibodies; MAR; IgG; IgA; testosterone; gonadotropins

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To analyse the factors predisposing to male immunological infertility from the hospital records of 508 patients that had been treated for infertility in the Turku University Central Hospital from 1980 to 2000. In addition, the hormonal status was investigated at the beginning of treatment. Results: Patients with a history of mumps, or either a fresh varicocele or a history of varicocele had statistically significant lower levels of MAR antisperm antibodies (ASAs) than patients with no such conditions. Repair of varicocele (either surgical or embolisation), showed a statistically significant enhancement of the total sperm cell counts in ejaculates, but it appeared not to have any influence on other parameters of the semen analysis (mobility and morphology). Of all male infertility patients, 66.3% had normal hormonal status at the beginning of treatment, 12.6% of patients had hypotestosteronemia and 22.1% had subclinical hypogonadism. Patients with subclinical hypogonadism had lower total sperm cell count in ejaculates than patients with normal hormonal status although they had statistically significant more offspring. In addition, it appeared that mumps orchitis as well as smoking and alcohol abuse are risk factors for subclinical hypogonadism. Conclusion: No clear predisposing factor for male immunological infertility could be found. However, patients with subclinical hypogonadism differed from other male infertility patients and thus may form a special group among the male infertility patients. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available