Predictive value of sperm motility characteristics assessed by computer-assisted sperm analysis in intrauterine insemination with superovulation in couples with unexplained infertility

Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 47-52

  Youn, Joung Sub ^a   Cha, Sun Hwa ^a,b   Park, Chan Woo ^b   Yang, Kwang Moon ^b   Kim, Jin Yeong ^b   Koong, Mi Kyoung ^b   Kang, Inn Soo ^b   Song, In Ok ^b   Han, Sang Chul ^b  

^a Clinic of Dr Min   (South Korea)

^b Kwandong University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Artificial; Computer assisted; Human; Image processing; Infertility; Insemination; Semen analysis; Sperm motility

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864741187     PISSN: 22338233     EISSN: 22338241     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5653/cerm.2011.38.1.47     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. ESHRE Capri Workshop Group. Intrauterine insemination. Hum Reprod Update 2009;15:265-77.
2. Stone BA, Vargyas JM, Ringler GE, Stein AL, Marrs RP. Determinants of the outcome of intrauterine insemination: analysis of outcomes of 9963 consecutive cycles. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;180:1522-34.
3. van der Westerlaken LA, Naaktgeboren N, Helmerhorst FM. Evaluation of pregnancy rates after intrauterine insemination according to indication, age, and sperm parameters. J Assist Reprod Genet 1998;15:359-64.
4. Ransom MX, Blotner MB, Bohrer M, Corsan G, Kemmann E. Does increasing frequency of intrauterine insemination improve pregnancy rates significantly during superovulation cycles? Fertil Steril 1994;61:303-7.
5. Dodson WC, Haney AF. Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and intrauterine insemination for treatment of infertility. Fertil Steril 1991;55:457-67.
6. Verhulst SM, Cohlen BJ, Hughes E, Te Velde E, Heineman MJ. Intra-uterine insemination for unexplained subfertility. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;(4):CD001838.
7. Steures P, van der Steeg JW, Mol BW, Eijkemans MJ, van der Veen F, Habbema JD, et al. Prediction of an ongoing pregnancy after intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril 2004;82:45-51.
8. Shulman A, Hauser R, Lipitz S, Frenkel Y, Dor J, Bider D, et al. Sperm motility is a major determinant of pregnancy outcome following intrauterine insemination. J Assist Reprod Genet 1998; 15:381-5.
9. Hauser R, Yogev L, Botchan A, Lessing JB, Paz G, Yavetz H. Intrauterine insemination in male factor subfertility: significance of sperm motility and morphology assessed by strict criteria. Andrologia 2001;33:13-7.
10. van Voorhis BJ, Barnett M, Sparks AE, Syrop CH, Rosenthal G, Dawson J. Effect of the total motile sperm count on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of intrauterine insemination and in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2001;75:661-8.
11. World Health Organization. WHO laboratory manual for the examination of human semen and sperm-cervical mucus interaction. 4th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999.
12. Jørgensen N, Auger J, Giwercman A, Irvine DS, Jensen TK, Jouannet P, et al. Semen analysis performed by different laboratory teams: an intervariation study. Int J Androl 1997;20:201-8.
13. Brazil C, Swan SH, Drobnis EZ, Liu F, Wang C, Redmon JB, et al. Standardized methods for semen evaluation in a multicenter research study. J Androl 2004;25:635-44.
14. Larsen L, Scheike T, Jensen TK, Bonde JP, Ernst E, Hjollund NH, 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;15:1562-7.
15. Shibahara H, Obara H, Ayustawati, Hirano Y, Suzuki T, Ohno A, et al. Prediction of pregnancy by intrauterine insemination using CASA estimates and strict criteria in patients with male factor infertility. Int J Androl 2004;27:63-8.
16. Macleod IC, Irvine DS. The predictive value of computer-assisted semen analysis in the context of a donor insemination programme. Hum Reprod 1995;10:580-6
17. Marshburn PB, McIntire D, Carr BR, Byrd W. Spermatozoal characteristics from fresh and frozen donor semen and their correlation with fertility outcome after intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril 1992;58:179-86.
18. Sidhu RS, Sharma RK, Agarwal A. Effects of cryopreserved semen quality and timed intrauterine insemination on pregnancy rate and gender of offspring in a donor insemination program. J Assist Reprod Genet 1997;14:531-7.
19. Hirano Y, Shibahara H, Obara H, Suzuki T, Takamizawa S, Yamaguchi C, et al. Relationships between sperm motility characteristics assessed by the computer-aided sperm analysis (CASA) and fertilization rates in vitro. J Assist Reprod Genet 2001;18:213-8.
20. Freour T, Jean M, Mirallie S, Langlois ML, Dubourdieu S, Barriere P. Predictive value of CASA parameters in IUI with frozen donor sperm. Int J Androl 2009;32:498-504.
21. Fréour T, Jean M, Mirallié S, Dubourdieu S, Barrière P. Computer-Assisted Sperm Analysis (CASA) parameters and their evolution during preparation as predictors of pregnancy in intrauterine insemination with frozen-thawed donor semen cycles. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2010;149:186-9.
22. 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;54:1100-6.
23. Eimers JM, te Velde ER, Gerritse R, Vogelzang ET, Looman CW, Habbema JD. The prediction of the chance to conceive in subfertile couples. Fertil Steril 1994;61:44-52.
24. Aitken RJ, Best FS, Warner P, Templeton A. A prospective study of the relationship between semen quality and fertility in cases of unexplained infertility. J Androl 1984;5:297-303.
25. Irvine DS, Aitken RJ. Predictive value of in-vitro sperm function tests in the context of an AID service. Hum Reprod 1986;1:539-45.
26. Ducot B, Spira A, Feneux D, Jouannet P. Male factors and the likelihood of pregnancy in infertile couples. II. Study of clinical characteristics--practical consequences. Int J Androl 1988;11:395-404.
27. Shibahara H, Mitsuo M, Inoue M, Hasegawa A, Shigeta M, Koyama K. Relationship between human in-vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection and the zona-free hamster egg penetration test. Hum Reprod 1998;13:1928-32.
28. Aitken RJ. Sperm function tests and fertility. Int J Androl 2006;29: 69-75.
29. Barratt CL, Tomlinson MJ, Cooke ID. Prognostic significance of computerized motility analysis for in vivo fertility. Fertil Steril 1993;60:520-5.
30. Paston MJ, Sarkar S, Oates RP, Badawy SZ. Computer-aided semen analysis variables as predictors of male fertility potential. Arch Androl 1994;33:93-9.
31. Sukcharoen N, Keith J, Irvine DS, Aitken RJ. Definition of the optimal criteria for identifying hyperactivated human spermatozoa at 25 Hz using in-vitro fertilization as a functional end-point. Hum Reprod 1995;10:2928-37.
32. Suarez SS. Control of hyperactivation in sperm. Hum Reprod Update 2008;14:647-57.
33. Nichol R, Hunter RH, Gardner DK, Leese HJ, Cooke GM. Concentrations of energy substrates in oviductal fluid and blood plasma of pigs during the peri-ovulatory period. J Reprod Fertil 1992;96: 699-707.
34. Yao Y, Ho P, Yeung WS. Effects of human follicular fluid on the capacitation and motility of human spermatozoa. Fertil Steril 2000; 73:680-6.