4.7 Article

Sperm vacuoles negatively affect outcomes in intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection in terms of pregnancy, implantation, and live-birth rates

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 100, Issue 2, Pages 379-385

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.04.033

Keywords

Clinical outcomes; intracytoplasmic; IMSI; live-birth rate; morphologically selected sperm injection; vacuoles

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To retrospectively evaluate whether sperm vacuoles influence clinical results, with a particular focus on live-birth rates, in 101 intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection (IMSI) cycles. Design: Retrospective, observational study. Setting: Medical center. Patient(s): A total of 101 couples with at least two failed intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) attempts and impaired sperm morphology. Intervention(s): Patients divided into two groups according to sperm morphology and vacuolization pattern: group A comprising patients with good quality spermatozoa (type I and/or type II spermatozoa) (n = 63 patients); group B comprising patients with low quality spermatozoa (type III and/or IV spermatozoa) (n = 38 patients). Main Outcome Measure(s): Fertilization rate, embryo quality, pregnancy, implantation, and live-birth rates. Result(s): No statistically significant differences were observed between group A and B with regard to early assisted reproduction outcomes (fertilization rate and embryo quality). However, the late outcomes (pregnancy, implantation, and live-birth rates) were statistically significantly higher in group A. Conclusion(s): These results confirm a correlation between sperm vacuoles and a negative IMSI outcome, suggesting that sperm vacuoles are related to the late paternal effect. (Fertil Steril (R) 2013; 100: 379-85. (C) 2013 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