4.7 Article

Alkaline and neutral Comet assay profiles of sperm DNA damage in clinical groups

期刊

HUMAN REPRODUCTION
卷 27, 期 3, 页码 652-658

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/der461

关键词

sperm; DNA fragmentation; Comet assay; chromosomal rearrangement; varicocele

资金

  1. FIS [PI080623]
  2. Generalitat de Catalunya [2009 SGR 1107]
  3. Catedra de Recerca Eugin-UAB

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The analysis of sperm DNA fragmentation has become a new marker to predict male infertility, and many techniques have been developed. The sperm Comet assay offers the possibility of differentiating single- and double-stranded DNA (ssDNA and dsDNA) breaks, which could have different effects on fertility. The objective of this study was to perform a descriptive characterization of different groups of patients, such as those with asthenoteratozoospermic (ATZ) with or without varicocele, oligoasthenoteratozoospermic (OATZ) or balanced chromosome rearrangements, as compared with fertile donors. The Comet assay was used to investigate sperm samples for ssDNA and dsDNA breaks. The analysis of alkaline and neutral Comet assays in different groups of patients showed different sperm DNA damage profiles. Most fertile donors presented low values for ssDNA and dsDNA fragmentation (low-equivalent Comet profile), which would be the best prognosis for achieving a pregnancy. OATZ, ATZ and ATZ with varicocele presented high percentages of ssDNA and dsDNA fragmentation (high-equivalent Comet assay profile), ATZ with varicocele being associated with the worst prognosis, due to higher levels of DNA fragmentation. Rearranged chromosome carriers display a very high variability and, interestingly, two different profiles were seen: a high-equivalent Comet assay profile, which could be compatible with a bad prognosis, and a non-equivalent Comet assay profile, which has also been found in three fertile donors. Comet assay profiles, applied to different clinical groups, may be useful for determining prognosis in cases of male infertility.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据