4.7 Article

Relationship between substances in seminal plasma and Acrobeads Test results

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 91, Issue 1, Pages 179-184

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.11.003

Keywords

Acrobeads Test; seminal plasma; insulin-like growth factor-I; macrophage migration inhibitory factor; sperm function

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To asses the effects of seminal plasma on sperm function. Design: Retrospective case-control study. Setting: University hospital. Patient(s): One hundred fourteen infertile men. Intervention(s): Acrobeads Test scores (0-4) and measurement of interleukin (TL)-6, soluble IL-6 receptor, epidermal growth factor, insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I), transforming growth factor-beta I, superoxide dismutase, calcitonin, and macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF) levels in seminal plasma. Main Outcome Measure(s): Kruskal-Wallis test to compare the concentrations of substances as a nonparametric test for differences among Acrobeads Test scores and a multivariable logistic regression model to find independent risk factors associated with abnormal Acrobeads Test results. Result(s): The Acrobeads Test score was 0 for 7 samples, 1 for 20 samples, 2 for 18 samples, 3 for 28 samples, and 4 for 41 samples. Age, abstinence period, and semen parameters, except for sperm motility and percentage of with abnormal morphology, had no effect on the Acrobeads Test results. Concentrations of IGF-I and MIF were significantly higher in patients with abnormal Acrobeads Test results. Multivariate analysis indicated that MIF and IGF-I were significantly associated with abnormal Acrobeads Test results (scores 0 to 1). Conclusion(s): Although further studies are needed, IGF-I and MIF in seminal plasma may have negative effects on sperm function. (Fertil Steril (R) 2009;91:179-84. (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