Practical semen analysis: From A to Z

Asian Journal of Andrology

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 14-20

  Brazil, Charlene ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Andrology laboratory; Quality assurance; Semen analysis; Sperm concentration; Sperm morphology; Sperm motility

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ANDROLOGY; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; MALE FERTILITY; MORPHOLOGY; PATIENT CARE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; SEMEN ANALYSIS; SPERMATOZOON COUNT; SPERMATOZOON DENSITY; SPERMATOZOON MOTILITY; TRAINING; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

HUMANS; MALE; MANUALS AS TOPIC; MEDICAL STAFF; QUALITY CONTROL; SEMEN ANALYSIS; SPERM COUNT; SPERM MOTILITY; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

EID: 76349100970     PISSN: 1008682X     EISSN: 17457262     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/aja.2008.51     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Guzick DS, Overstreet JW, Factor-Litvak P, Brazil CK, Nakajima ST, et al., Sperm morphology, motility, and concentration in fertile and infertile men. N Engl J Med 2001; 345: 1388-1393
2. Swan SH, Brazil C, Drobnis EZ, Liu F, Kruse RL, et al., Geographic differences in semen quality of fertile U.S. males. Environ Health Perspect 2003; 111: 414-420
3. Overstreet JW, Fuh VL, Gould J, Howards SS, Lieber MM, et al., Chronic treatment with finasteride daily does not affect spermatogenesis or semen production in young men. J Urol 1999; 162: 1295-1300
4. World Health Organization. WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen, 5th ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
5. Fisch H. Declining worldwide sperm counts: disproving a myth. Urol Clin North Am 2008; 35: 137-146
6. Andersson AM, Jørgensen N, Main KM, Toppari J, Rajpert-De Meyts E, et al., Adverse trends in male reproductive health: we may have reached a crucial 'tipping point'. Int J Androl 2008; 31: 74-80.
7. Kruger TF, Menkveld R, Stander FS, Lombard CJ, Van Der Merwe JP, et al., Sperm morphologic features as a prognostic factor in in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1986; 46: 1118-1123
8. Morgentaler A, Fung MY, Harris DH, Powers RD, Alper MM. Sperm morphology and in vitro fertilization outcome: a direct comparison of World Health Organization and strict criteria methodologies. Fertil Steril 1995; 64: 1177-1182
9. Nallella KP, Sharma RK, Aziz N, Agarwal A. Significance of sperm characteristics in the evaluation of male infertility. Fertil Steril 2006; 85: 629-634
10. Bonde JP, Ernst E, Jensen TK, Hjollund NH, Kolstad H, et al., Relation between semen quality and fertility: a populationbased study of 430 first-pregnancy planners. Lancet 1998; 352: 1172-1177
11. Lewis S. Is sperm evaluation useful in predicting human fertility? Reproduction 2007; 134: 31-40.
12. Cooper TG, Björndahl L, Vreeburg J, Nieschlag E. Semen analysis and external quality control schemes for semen analysis need global standardization. Int J Androl 2002; 25: 306-311
13. Cooper TG, Brazil C, Swan SH, Overstreet JW. Ejaculate volume is seriously underestimated when semen is pipetted or decanted into cylinders from the collection vessel. J Androl 2007; 28: 1-4.
14. Brazil C, Swan SH, Drobnis EZ, Liu F, Wang C, et al.; Study for Future Families Research Group. Standardized methods for semen evaluation in a multicenter research study. J Androl 2004; 25: 635-644 (Pubitemid 38880199)
15. Tomlinson M, Turner J, Powell G, Sakkas D. One-step disposable chambers for sperm concentration and motility assessment: how do they compare with the World Health Organization's recommended methods? Hum Reprod 2001; 16: 121-124
16. World Health Organization. WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination of Human Semen and Sperm-cervical Mucus Interaction, 3rd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1992.
17. World Health Organization. WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination of Human Semen and Sperm-cervical Mucus Interaction, 4th edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999.
18. Ombelet W, Bosmans E, Janssen M, Cox A, Maes M, et al., Multicenter study on reproducibility of sperm morphology assessments. Arch Androl 1998; 41: 103-114
19. Mortimer D, Menkveld R. Sperm morphology assessmenthistorical perspectives and current opinions. J Androl 2001; 22: 192-205.
20. Menkveld R, Stander FS, Kotze TJ, Kruger TF, Van Zyl JA. The evaluation of morphological characteristics of human spermatozoa according to stricter criteria. Hum Reprod 1990; 5: 586-592
21. Kruger TF. Strict criteria for sperm morphology. In: Lipshultz L, Howards S, editors. Infertility in the Male. St. Louis: Mosby; 1997. p487-90.
22. Kruger TF, Acosta AA, Simmons KF, Swanson RJ, Matta JF, et al., Predictive value of abnormal sperm morphology in in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1988; 49: 112-117
23. Gunalp S, Onculoglu C, Gurgan T, Kruger T, Lombard CJ. A study of semen parameters with emphasis on sperm morphology in a fertile population: an attempt to develop clinical thresholds. Hum Reprod 2001; 16: 110-114
24. Menkveld R, Wong WY, Lombard CJ, Wetzels AM, Thomas CM, et al., Semen parameters, including WHO and strict criteria morphology, in a fertile and subfertile population: an effort towards standardization of in-vivo thresholds. Hum Reprod 2001; 16: 1165-1171
25. American Association of Bioanalysts. Available from: http:// www.aab.org.
26. Hellstrom WJ, Overstreet JW, Yu A, Saikali K, Shen W, et al., Tadalafil has no detrimental effect on human spermatogenesis or reproductive hormones. J Urol 2003; 170: 887-891
27. Jequier AM. Is quality assurance in semen analysis still really necessary? A clinician's viewpoint. Hum Reprod 2005; 20: 2039-2042
28. Dunphy BC, Kay R, Barratt CL, Cooke ID. Quality control during the conventional analysis of semen, an essential exercise. J Androl 1989; 10: 378-385
29. Björndahl L, Barratt C, Fraser LR, Kvist U, Mortimer D. ESHRE basic semen analysis courses 1995-1999: immediate beneficial effects of standardized training. Hum Reprod 2002; 17: 1299-1305
30. Brazil C, Swan SH, Tollner CR, Treece C, Drobnis EZ, et al., Quality control of laboratory methods for semen evaluation in a multicenter research study. J Androl 2004; 25: 645-656 (Pubitemid 38880200)
31. Keel BA, Quinn P, Schmidt CF Jr, Serafy NT Jr, Serafy NT Sr, et al., Results of the American Association of Bioanalysts national proficiency testing programme in andrology. Hum Reprod 2000; 15: 680-686
32. Riddell D, Pacey A, Whittington K. Lack of compliance by UK andrology laboratories with World Health Organization; recommendations for sperm morphology assessment. Hum Reprod 2005; 12: 3441-3445
33. Cooper TG, Atkinson AD, Nieschlag E. Experience with external quality control in spermatology. Hum Reprod 1999; 14: 765-769