Comparative study of Sperm Motility Analysis System and conventional microscopic semen analysis

Reproductive Medicine and Biology

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 195-200

  Komori, Kazuhiko ^a   Tsujimura, Akira ^a   Ishijima, Sumio ^b   Tanjapatkul, Phanu ^a   Fujita, Kazutoshi ^a   Matsuoka, Yasuhiro ^a   Takao, Tetsuya ^a   Miyagawa, Yasushi ^a   Takada, Shingo ^a   Okuyama, Akihiko ^a  

^a OSAKA UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

^b TOKYO INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Semen analysis; Sperm Motility Analysis System

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ANALYSIS; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MALE INFERTILITY; MICROSCOPY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEMEN ANALYSIS; SPERMATOZOON DENSITY; SPERMATOZOON MOTILITY; WILCOXON SIGNED RANKS TEST;

EID: 33746893394     PISSN: 14455781     EISSN: 14470578     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1447-0578.2006.00141.x     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Jorgensen N, Auger J, Giwercman A et al. Semen analysis performed by different laboratory teams: An intervariation study. Int J Androl 1997; 20: 201-208.
2. World Health Organization. WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination of Human Semen and Semen-Cervical Mucus Interaction, 4th edn. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
3. Keel BA, Stembridge TW, Pineda G, Serafy NT, Sr. Lack of standardization in performance of the semen analysis among laboratories in the United States. Fertil Steril 2002; 78: 603-608.
4. Johnson JE, Boone WR, Blackhurst DW. Manual versus computer-automated semen analyses. Part I. Comparison of counting chambers. Fertil Steril 1996; 65: 150-155.
5. Johnson JE, Boone WR, Blackhurst DW. Manual versus computer-automated semen analyses. Part II. Determination of the working range of a computer-automated semen analyzer. Fertil Steril 1996; 65: 156-159.
6. Macleod IC, Irvine DS. The predictive value of computer-assisted semen analysis in the context of a donor insemination programme. Hum Reprod 1995; 10: 580-586.
7. Barratt CL, Tomlinson MJ, Cooke ID. Prognostic significance of computerized motility analysis for in vivo fertility. Fertil Steril 1993; 60: 520-525.
8. Paston MJ, Sarkar S, Oates RP, Badawy SZ. Computer-aided semen analysis variables as predictors of male fertility potential. Arch Androl 1994; 33: 93-99.
9. Larsen L, Scheike T, Jensen TK et al. Computer-assisted semen analysis parameters as predictors for fertility of men from the general population. The Danish First Pregnancy Planner Study Team. Hum Reprod 2000; 15: 1562-1567.
10. Bonde JP, Ernst E, Jensen TK et al. Relation between semen quality and fertility: A population-based study of 430 first-pregnancy planners. Lancet 1998; 352: 1172-1177.
11. Jouannet P, Ducot B, Feneux D, Spira A. Male factors and the likelihood of pregnancy in infertile couples. I. Study of sperm characteristics. Int J Androl 1988; 11: 379-394.
12. Bostofte E, Bagger P, Michael A, Stakemann G. Fertility prognosis for infertile men: Results of follow-up study of semen analysis in infertile men from two different populations evaluated by the Cox regression model. Fertil Steril 1990; 54: 1100-1106.
13. Yeung CH, Cooper TG, Nieschlag E. A technique for standardization and quality control of subjective sperm motility assessments in semen analysis. Fertil Steril 1997; 67: 1156-1158.
14. Keel BA. How reliable are results from the semen analysis? Fertil Steril 2004; 82: 41-44.
15. De Geyter C, De Geyter M, Koppers B, Nieschlag E. Diagnostic accuracy of computer-assisted sperm motion analysis. Hum Reprod 1998; 13: 2512-2520.
16. Holt W, Watson P, Curry M, Holt C. Reproducibility of computer-aided semen analysis: Comparison of five different systems used in a practical workshop. Fertil Steril 1994; 62: 1277-1282.
17. Ginsburg KA, Armant DR. The influence of chamber characteristics on the reliability of sperm concentration and movement measurements obtained by manual and videomicrographic analysis. Fertil Steril 1990; 53: 882-887.
18. Mortimer D, Fraser L. Consensus workshop on advanced diagnostic andrology techniques. ESHRE (European Soc Human Reprod Embryology) Androl Special Interest Group. Hum Reprod 1996; 11: 1463-1479.
19. Sharma RK, Tolentino MV Jr, Thomas AJ Jr, Agarwal A. Optimal dose and duration of exposure to artificial stimulants in cryopreserved human spermatozoa. J Urol 1996; 155: 568-573.
20. ESHRE Andrology Special Interest Group. Guidelines on the application of CASA technology in the analysis of spermatozoa. ESHRE Andrology Special Interest Group. European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology. Hum Reprod 1998; 13: 142-145.