4.7 Article

Artificial oocyte activation with calcium ionophore A23187 in intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles using surgically retrieved spermatozoa

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 92, Issue 1, Pages 131-136

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.04.046

Keywords

ICSI; spermatozoa; calcium; testicle; epididymis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To evaluate the effect of artificial oocyte activation (AOA) on intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles using surgically retrieved sperm. Design: Laboratory study. Setting: Fertility/assisted fertilization center. Patient(s): Couples undergoing surgical sperm retrieval for ICSI (n = 204). Intervention(s): Application of calcium ionophore A23187 for AOA. Main Outcome Measure(s): Cycles were divided into experimental groups according to the origin of the sperm used for injection and the type of azoospermia: [1] testicular sperm aspiration in nonobstructive-azoospermic patients (TESA-NOA group, n = 58), [2] TESA in obstructive-azoospermic patients (TESA-OA group, n = 48), [3] and percutaneous epididymal sperm aspiration in obstructive-azoospermic patients (PESA-OA, n = 98). For each experimental group, cycles where AOA was applied (subgroup: activation) were compared with cycles in which AOA was not applied (Subgroup: control). The fertilization, high-quality embryo, implantation, and pregnancy rates were compared among the subgroups. Result(s): For patients undergoing TESA, AOA did not improve ICSI outcomes for either type of azoospermia. However, for cases in which the injected sperm were retrieved from the epididymis, a statistically significantly increased rate of high-quality embryos was observed with AOA. Conclusion(s): Artificial oocyte activation may improve ICSI outcomes in azoospermic patients when epididymal, but not testicular spermatozoa, are injected. (Fertil Steril (R) 2009;92:131-6. (C)2009 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available