Evolution of the basic semen analysis and processing sperm.
Journal
Current opinion in urology
ISSN: 1473-6586
Titre abrégé: Curr Opin Urol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9200621
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 01 2023
01 01 2023
Historique:
pubmed:
14
10
2022
medline:
1
12
2022
entrez:
13
10
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The sixth edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen was recently published with specific step-by-step instructions for semen evaluation and sperm processing. Point-of-care (POC) testing for semen evaluation and microfluidics for sperm processing are rapidly evolving technologies that could impact how we evaluate and process sperm. Understanding the updated manual in the context of these novel technologies is important. Proper standardization of semen evaluation and sperm processing will allow for consistent high-quality results among laboratories worldwide. POC testing could improve access to semen evaluations that generate referrals to male infertility specialists for further assessment. Microfluidics can select functional sperm with decreased DNA fragmentation in semen and testicular biopsy samples for assisted reproductive technology (ART). Clinical outcomes, such as pregnancy rates and live birth rates, have not been shown to be consistently improved with these technologies compared to conventional techniques, although high level evidence research in this area is limited. POC testing and microfluidics have the potential to be combined with machine learning technologies to improve fertility care. If these technologies are appropriately optimized, they could change how we evaluate and process sperm, and potentially lead to improved ART outcomes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36226727
doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000001054
pii: 00042307-202301000-00005
doi:
Types de publication
Review
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
16-23Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Schlegel PN, Sigman M, Collura B, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of infertility in men: AUA/ASRM guideline part I. Fertil Steril 2021; 115:54–61.
World Health Organization. WHO laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen. 2021. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240030787 .
Björndahl L, Kirkman Brown J. Editorial Board Members of the WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen. The sixth edition of the WHO laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen: ensuring quality and standardization in basic examination of human ejaculates. Fertil Steril 2022; 117:246–251.
Iso.org. ISO 23162:2021: Basic semen examination - Specification and test methods [Internet]. 2021 (updated 2021 May; cited 2022 August. Available from: https://www.iso.org/standard/74800.html
Barratt CLR, Wang C, Baldi E, et al. What advances may the future bring to the diagnosis, treatment, and care of male sexual and reproductive health? Fertil Steril 2022; 117:258–267.
Björndahl L. A paradigmatic shift in the care of male factor infertility: how can the recommendations for basic semen examination in the sixth edition of the WHO manual and the ISO 23162:2021 standard help? Reprod Biomed Online 2022; 45:731–736.
Wang C, Mbizvo M, Festin MP, et al ., Editorial Board Members of the WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen. Evolution of the WHO “Semen” processing manual from the first (1980) to the sixth edition (2021). Fertil Steril. 2022;117:237–45. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.11.037 .
Boitrelle F, Shah R, Saleh R, et al. The sixth edition of the WHO manual for human semen analysis: a critical review and SWOT analysis. Life 2021; 11:1368.
Kizilay F, Altay B. Sperm function tests in clinical practice. Turk J Urol 2017; 43:393–400.
Marzano G, Chiriacò MS, Primiceri E, et al. Sperm selection in assisted reproduction: a review of established methods and cutting-edge possibilities. Biotechnol Adv 2020; 40:107498.
Tsao YT, Yang CY, Wen YC, et al. Point-of-care semen analysis of patients with infertility via smartphone and colorimetric paper-based diagnostic device. Bioeng Transl Med 2021; 6:e10176.
Kanakasabapathy MK, Sadasivam M, Singh A, et al. An automated smartphone-based diagnostic assay for point-of-care semen analysis. Sci Transl Med 2017; 9:eaai7863.
Douglas C, Parekh N, Kahn LG, et al. A novel approach to improving the reliability of manual semen analysis: a paradigm shift in the workup of infertile men. World J Mens Health 2021; 39:172–185.
Oehninger S, Ombelet W. Limits of current male fertility testing. Fertil Steril 2019; 111:835–841.
Punjabi U, Wyns C, Mahmoud A, et al. Fifteen years of Belgian experience with external quality assessment of semen analysis. Andrology 2016; 4:1084–1093.
Zuvela E, Matson P. Performance of four chambers to measure sperm concentration: results from an external quality assurance programme. Reprod Biomed Online 2020; 41:671–678.
Vij SC, Agarwal A. Editorial on “An automated smartphone-based diagnostic assay for point-of-care semen analysis”. Ann Transl Med 2017; 5:507.
Sung WH, Tsao YT, Shen CJ, et al. Small-volume detection: platform developments for clinically-relevant applications. J Nanobiotechnol 2021; 19:114.
Kobori Y. Home testing for male factor infertility: a review of current options. Fertil Steril 2019; 111:864–870.
Onofre J, Geenen L, Cox A, et al. Simplified sperm testing devices: a possible tool to overcome lack of accessibility and inconsistency in male factor infertility diagnosis. An opportunity for low- and middle- income countries. Facts Views Vis Obgyn 2021; 13:79–93.
Hammarberg K, Kirkman M. Infertility in resource-constrained settings: moving towards amelioration. Reprod Biomed Online 2013; 26:189–195.
Klotz KL, Coppola MA, Labrecque M, et al. Clinical and consumer trial performance of a sensitive immunodiagnostic home test that qualitatively detects low concentrations of sperm following vasectomy. J Urol 2008; 180:2569–2576.
Coppola MA, Klotz KL, Kim KA, et al. SpermCheck Fertility, an immunodiagnostic home test that detects normozoospermia and severe oligozoospermia. Hum Reprod 2010; 25:853–861.
Schaff UY, Fredriksen LL, Epperson JG, et al. Novel centrifugal technology for measuring sperm concentration in the home. Fertil Steril 2017; 107:358.e4–364.e4.
Yoon YE, Kim TY, Shin TE, et al. Validation of SwimCount TM , a novel home-based device that detects progressively motile spermatozoa: correlation with World Health Organization 5th semen analysis. World J Mens Health 2020; 38:191–197.
Matsuura K, Huang HW, Chen MC, et al. Relationship between porcine sperm motility and sperm enzymatic activity using paper-based devices. Sci Rep 2017; 7:46213.
Nosrati R, Gong MM, San Gabriel MC, et al. Paper-based quantification of male fertility potential. Clin Chem 2016; 62:458–465.
Segerink LI, Sprenkels AJ, ter Braak PM, et al. On-chip determination of spermatozoa concentration using electrical impedance measurements. Lab Chip 2010; 10:1018–1024.
Su TW, Erlinger A, Tseng D, Ozcan A. Compact and light-weight automated semen analysis platform using lensfree on-chip microscopy. Anal Chem 2010; 82:8307–8312.
Kobori Y, Pfanner P, Prins GS, Niederberger C. Novel device for male infertility screening with single-ball lens microscope and smartphone. Fertil Steril 2016; 106:574–578.
Cheon WH, Park HJ, Park MJ, et al. Validation of a smartphone-based, computer-assisted sperm analysis system compared with laboratory-based manual microscopic semen analysis and computer-assisted semen analysis. Investig Clin Urol 2019; 60:380–387.
Bar-Chama N, Rabinovitch L, Honig S. Utilizing the yo® home sperm test novice users obtained accurate results as compared to trained technicians. Fertil Steril 2019; 112:e63.
Agarwal A, Panner Selvam MK, Sharma R, et al. Home sperm testing device versus laboratory sperm quality analyzer: comparison of motile sperm concentration. Fertil Steril 2018; 110:1277–1284.
Gode F, Bodur T, Gunturkun F, et al. Comparison of microfluid sperm sorting chip and density gradient methods for use in intrauterine insemination cycles. Fertil Steril 2019; 112:842.e1–848.e1.
Ozcan P, Takmaz T, Yazici MGK, et al. Does the use of microfluidic sperm sorting for the sperm selection improve in vitro fertilization success rates in male factor infertility? J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2021; 47:382–388.
Ahmadkhani N, Hosseini M, Saadatmand M, Abbaspourrad A. The influence of the female reproductive tract and sperm features on the design of microfluidic sperm-sorting devices. J Assist Reprod Genet 2022; 39:19–36.
Simchi M, Riordon J, You JB, et al. Selection of high-quality sperm with thousands of parallel channels. Lab Chip 2021; 21:2464–2475.
Schlegel PN, Sigman M, Collura B, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of infertility in men: AUA/ASRM guideline part II. Fertil Steril 2021; 115:62–69.
Fácio CL, Previato LF, Machado-Paula LA, et al. Comparison of two sperm processing techniques for low complexity assisted fertilization: sperm washing followed by swim-up and discontinuous density gradient centrifugation. JBRA Assist Reprod 2016; 20:206–211.
Boomsma CM, Cohlen BJ, Farquhar C. Semen preparation techniques for intrauterine insemination. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 10:CD004507.
Daneshmandpour Y, Pashazadeh F, Ansari F, et al. The comparative effect of magnetic activated cell sorting, density gradient centrifugation and swim up on assisted reproduction outcomes, sperm DNA fragmentation, and aneuploidy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Meta Gene 2019; 22:100607.
Lepine S, McDowell S, Searle LM, et al. Advanced sperm selection techniques for assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 7:CD010461.
Xiao S, Riordon J, Simchi M, et al. FertDish: microfluidic sperm selection-in-a-dish for intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Lab Chip 2021; 21:775–783.
Quinn MM, Jalalian L, Ribeiro S, et al. Microfluidic sorting selects sperm for clinical use with reduced DNA damage compared to density gradient centrifugation with swim-up in split semen samples. Hum Reprod 2018; 33:1388–1393.
Anbari F, Khalili MA, Sultan Ahamed AM, et al. Microfluidic sperm selection yields higher sperm quality compared to conventional method in ICSI program: a pilot study. Syst Biol Reprod Med 2021; 67:137–143.
Yetkinel S, Kilicdag EB, Aytac PC, et al. Effects of the microfluidic chip technique in sperm selection for intracytoplasmic sperm injection for unexplained infertility: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Assist Reprod Genet 2019; 36:403–409.
Aydin Ş, Bulgan Kiliçdağ E, Çağlar Aytaç P, et al. Prospective randomized controlled study of a microfluidic chip technology for sperm selection in male infertility patients. Andrologia 2022; 54:e14415.
Quinn MM, Ribeiro S, Juarez-Hernandez F, et al. Microfluidic preparation of spermatozoa for ICSI produces similar embryo quality to density-gradient centrifugation: a pragmatic, randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2022; 37:1406–1413.
Vasilescu SA, Khorsandi S, Ding L, et al. A microfluidic approach to rapid sperm recovery from heterogeneous cell suspensions. Sci Rep 2021; 11:7917.
Feng H, Jafek A, Samuel R, et al. High efficiency rare sperm separation from biopsy samples in an inertial focusing device. Analyst 2021; 146:3368–3377.
Lee R, Witherspoon L, Robinson M, et al. Automated rare sperm identification from low-magnification microscopy images of dissociated microsurgical testicular sperm extraction samples using deep learning. Fertil Steril 2022; 118:90–99.
Wu DJ, Badamjav O, Reddy VV, et al. A preliminary study of sperm identification in microdissection testicular sperm extraction samples with deep convolutional neural networks. Asian J Androl 2021; 23:135–139.
McCallum C, Riordon J, Wang Y, et al. Deep learning-based selection of human sperm with high DNA integrity. Commun Biol 2019; 2:250.
Abdullah KAL, Atazhanova T, Chavez-Badiola A, Shivhare SB. Automation in ART: paving the way for the future of infertility treatment. Reprod Sci 2022; doi: 10.1007/s43032-022-00941-y. [Online ahead of print].
doi: 10.1007/s43032-022-00941-y.