Comparison of conventionalin vitrofertilisation and intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes in patients with moderate oligoasthenozoospermia

Secretomes from Conventional Insemination and Intra-Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection Derived Embryos Differentially Modulate Endometrial Cells In Vitro

Conventional Insemination (CI) and Intra-Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) are routinely used insemination methods in clinical Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) settings. However, the existing data on the developmental competence and implantation potential of CI and ICSI derived embryos are not unequivocal. This prospective study on 23 patients undergoing ART treatment explored whether the secretomes of CI- and ICSI-derived embryo differentially alter the expression of integrins (αv and β3 integrin) and MUCIN-1 (MUC-1) in a human endometrial epithelial cell line (Ishikawa). Immunocytochemical data demonstrated that the secretome of CI-derived top quality (GI) embryos induced higher (p < 0.05) expression of ɑv β3 compared to sibling ICSI derived G1 embryos in Ishikawa cells. Though, relative levels of the transcript for MUC-1, anti-adhesion molecule did not show a significant difference between the study groups, immunocytochemical analysis demonstrated significantly (p < 0.0001) higher expression of MUC-1 in cells treated with ICSI-derived embryo secretome, compared to that treated with CI -derived embryo secretome. These results suggest that secretomes from CI and ICSI embryos differentially modulate the endometrial cells in vitro. This hints at differences in the ability of CI- and ICSI- derived embryos to alter endometrial profile.

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection versus conventional in-vitro fertilisation for couples with infertility with non-severe male factor: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Introduced in 1992, intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was initially indicated for severe male infertility; however, its use has since been expanded to non-severe male infertility. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ICSI versus conventional in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) in couples with infertility with non-severe male factor.

METHODS

We conducted an investigator-initiated, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial in ten reproductive medicine centres across China. Couples with infertility with non-severe male factor without a history of poor fertilisation were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo either ICSI or conventional IVF. The primary outcome was live birth after first embryo transfer. We performed the primary analysis in the intention-to-treat population using log-binomial regression models for categorical outcomes or linear regression models for continuous outcomes, adjusting for centre. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03298633, and is completed.

FINDINGS

Between April 4, 2018, and Nov 15, 2021, 3879 couples were screened, of whom 2387 (61·5%) couples were randomly assigned (1184 [49·6%] to the ICSI group and 1203 [50·4%] to the conventional IVF group). After excluding couples who were ineligible, randomised twice, or withdrew consent, 1154 (97·5%) in the ICSI group and 1175 (97·7%) in the conventional IVF group were included in the primary analysis. Live birth after first embryo transfer occurred in 390 (33·8%) couples in the ICSI group and in 430 (36·6%) couples in the conventional IVF group (adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0·92 [95% CI 0·83-1·03]; p=0·16). Two (0·2%) neonatal deaths were reported in the ICSI group and one (0·1%) in the conventional IVF group.

INTERPRETATION

In couples with infertility with non-severe male factor, ICSI did not improve live birth rate compared with conventional IVF. Given that ICSI is an invasive procedure associated with additional costs and potential increased risks to offspring health, routine use is not recommended in this population.

FUNDING

National Natural Science Foundation of China, National Key Research and Development Program, Beijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission, and Peking University Third Hospital.

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection vs. in-vitro fertilization in couples in whom the male partners had a semen analysis within normal reference ranges: An open debate

During recent decades, the application of intracytoplasmic sperm injection has increased considerably worldwide, especially in couples with non-male factor infertility. However, several studies analyzing the broad use of intracytoplasmic sperm injection, even in cases with a normal semen analysis, have collectively demonstrated no benefits compared to conventional in-vitro fertilization. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to support the intracytoplasmic sperm injection technique vs. in-vitro fertilization in cases of poor ovarian response or a low number of oocytes collected, or in patients with advanced maternal age. Since the intracytoplasmic sperm injection technique is more operator-dependent and invasive, its use should only be recommended in cases of male-factor infertility. There is some evidence showing that intracytoplasmic sperm injection is linked with an increased risk of birth defects. Albeit this evidence is limited, and currently it is not possible to draw a firm conclusion on these concerns, we do believe that these risks should be rigorously investigated. Thus, this review aims to clarify the debate on the application of the intracytoplasmic sperm injection procedure, as compared to standard in-vitro fertilization, in those assisted reproductive technology cycles without a clear male factor infertility. Furthermore, we try to clarify whether intracytoplasmic sperm injection would result in a higher live birth rate than in-vitro fertilization, in couples with non-male factor infertility.

From Diagnosis to Treatment: Comprehensive Care by Reproductive Urologists in Assisted Reproductive Technology

Infertility is a global health concern, with male factors playing an especially large role. Unfortunately, however, the contributions made by reproductive urologists in managing male infertility under assisted reproductive technology (ART) often go undervalued. This narrative review highlights the important role played by reproductive urologists in diagnosing and treating male infertility as well as any barriers they face when providing services. This manuscript presents a comprehensive review of reproductive urologists' role in managing male infertility, outlining their expertise in diagnosing and managing male infertility as well as reversible causes and performing surgical techniques such as sperm retrieval. This manuscript investigates the barriers limiting urologist involvement such as limited availability, awareness among healthcare professionals, and financial constraints. This study highlights a decrease in male fertility due to lifestyle factors like sedentary behavior, obesity, and substance abuse. It stresses the significance of conducting an evaluation process involving both male and female partners to identify any underlying factors contributing to infertility and to identify patients who do not require any interventions beyond ART. We conclude that engaging urologists more effectively in infertility management is key to optimizing fertility outcomes among couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatments and requires greater education among healthcare providers regarding the role urologists and lifestyle factors that could have an effect on male fertility.

Is It Time for Andrology and Endocrinology Professionals in Assisted Reproduction Centers?

Epidemiologists indicate that about half of the couple's infertility cases are due to a male factor. Despite this, the role of andrologists or endocrinologists in assisted reproductive technique (ART) centers is still underestimated. According to our literature review, this reduces the chance of a thorough clinical evaluation of the male partners, which, sometimes consists only in a mere semen analysis, usually performed by laboratory technicians. A more complete diagnostic process could lead to the identification of potentially treatable causes of infertility, the recognition of diseases that require immediate treatment, and to the discovery of genetic diseases and, therefore, transmissible to the offspring. It can also increase the success rate of ART resulting in less psychological and financial burden for both public health resources and infertile couples. The presence of medical personnel with andrological and endocrinological skills in the ART centers represents the first step in creating 'precision medicine'. We hope that the guidelines of the various scientific societies will clearly contemplate this possibility.

Opportunities and Limits of Conventional IVF versus ICSI: It Is Time to Come off the Fence

Conventional IVF (c-IVF) is one of the most practiced assisted reproductive technology (ART) approaches used worldwide. However, in the last years, the number of c-IVF procedures has dropped dramatically in favor of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in cases of non-male-related infertility. In this review, we have outlined advantages and disadvantages associated with c-IVF, highlighting the essential steps governing its success, its limitations, the methodology differences among laboratories and the technical progress. In addition, we have debated recent insights into fundamental questions, including indications regarding maternal age, decreased ovarian reserve, endometriosis, autoimmunity, single oocyte retrieval-cases as well as preimplantation genetic testing cycles. The “overuse” of ICSI procedures in several clinical situations of ART has been critically discussed. These insights will provide a framework for a better understanding of opportunities associated with human c-IVF and for best practice guidelines applicability in the reproductive medicine field.

V, Joseph D, Meitei HY, Asampille G, Kumar P, Gowda G. A. N, Kalthur G, Kovacic B, Adiga SK. ICSI in non-male factor infertility patients does not alter metabolomic signature in sibling embryos as evidenced by sensitivity enhanced nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was developed to overcome male factor infertility, however, there recently has been an increasing trend in ICSI usage irrespective of the etiology, demonstrating an overuse of this insemination technique. There is a limited knowledge on the behaviour of ICSI derived embryos in non-male factor infertility patients. Metabolomic assessment of preimplantation embryos in conjunction with morphological evaluation can provide better understanding of embryonic behaviour. Hence, this study was undertaken to explore if there are any metabolomic differences between IVF and ICSI derived sibling day-5 blastocysts from non-male factor infertility patients. This prospective study included nineteen couples with non-male factor infertility undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technology. The sibling oocytes retrieved from each patient were randomly assigned to two groups and inseminated either by IVF or ICSI. Spent culture media (SCM) in which embryos were cultured up to day 5 were collected and investigated using sensitivity enhanced NMR based metabolite profiling utilizing high resolution (800 MHz) NMR equipped with cryogenically cooled micro-coil (1.7 mm) probe. The metabolomic signature between IVF and ICSI derived sibling blastocysts was assessed. A significant reduction in the concentrations of pyruvate, citrate, glucose and lysine were observed in both IVF and ICSI sibling embryos compared to medium control (P< 0.05–0.001). Further, histidine and valine level was found lower in ICSI embryos compared to medium control (P<0.05) during 96 hours of in vitro culture. Notably, between IVF and ICSI SCM, no significant difference in the concentration of the metabolites was found. Our results suggest that ICSI in non-male factor does not alter the SCM metabolomic signature during 96 hours of embryonic development.

Contemporary Use of ICSI and Epigenetic Risks to Future Generations

Since the birth of Louise Brown in 1978 via IVF, reproductive specialists have acquired enormous knowledge and refined several procedures, which are nowadays applied in assisted reproductive technology (ART). One of the most critical steps in this practice is the fertilization process. In the early days of IVF, a remarkable concern was the unpleasant outcomes of failed fertilization, overtaken by introducing intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), delineating a real breakthrough in modern ART. ICSI became standard practice and was soon used as the most common method to fertilize oocytes. It has been used for severe male factor infertility and non-male factors, such as unexplained infertility or advanced maternal age, without robust scientific evidence. However, applying ICSI blindly is not free of potential detrimental consequences since novel studies report possible health consequences to offspring. DNA methylation and epigenetic alterations in sperm cells of infertile men might help explain some of the adverse effects reported in ICSI studies on reproductive health in future generations. Collected data concerning the health of ICSI children over the past thirty years seems to support the notion that there might be an increased risk of epigenetic disorders, congenital malformations, chromosomal alterations, and subfertility in babies born following ICSI compared to naturally conceived children. However, it is still to be elucidated to what level these data are associated with the cause of infertility or the ICSI technique. This review provides an overview of epigenetic mechanisms and possible imprinting alterations following the use of ART, in particular ICSI. It also highlights the sperm contribution to embryo epigenetic regulation and the risks of in vitro culture conditions on epigenetic dysregulation. Lastly, it summarizes the literature concerning the possible epigenetic disorders in children born after ART.

Efficacy of electroacupuncture for the treatment of asthenozoospermia: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Infertility has affected millions of couples aged 15 to 44 years worldwide. Recently, some studies suggest that abnormal semen quality is the main cause of male infertility and asthenozoospermia accounts for 19% of the infertility of men. The situation has brought a huge burden to the patient with asthenozoospermia and society. Acupuncture is a part of traditional Chinese medicine. Electroacupuncture (EA) has gained in popularity. Although a positive effect of manual acupuncture and EA on sperm parameters has been documented in several studies, there still a lack of more solid evidence. We hope to provide a convincing study for EA.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The electronic databases of MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials. org, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database (CNKI), Wan fang Database, China Biology Medicine Database (CBM), VIP Science Technology Periodical Database, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry will be retrieved. All the randomized controlled trials of rESWT for patients with CP/CPPS will be included. We will evaluate the outcomes including NIH-CPSI, VAS, IPSS, IIEF-5, and conduct this study strictly according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

RESULTS

The present study is a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis without results, and data analysis will be carried out after the protocol. We will share our findings on October 31st, 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

EA for asthenospermia is a microtrauma surgery with less pain. EA can effectively improve sperm motility; however, its efficacy has not been assessed scientifically and systematically. To address this limitation, this study will inspect the efficacy and safety of the EA in patients with asthenospermia.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Formal ethical approval is not required in this protocol. We will collect and analyze data based on published studies, and since there are no patients involved in this study, individual privacy will not be under concerns. The results of this review will be disseminated to peer-reviewed journals or submit to related conferences.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER

INPLASY2020100071.

Is Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection the Solution for all in Unexplained Infertility?

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was first introduced as a supplemental method to conventional in vitro fertilization (c-IVF) for couples with severe male factor infertility to overcome the poor fertilization rate, while its indications expanded in current clinical practice and gained worldwide popularity. However, ICSI is invasive and crosses all natural barriers, raising several unresolved concerns regarding procedure-dependent and procedure-independent risks, as well as the characteristic of being labor-intensive and more expensive than c-IVF. This review is aimed to draw readers' attention, to the widespread use of ICSI worldwide, with its effectiveness in different indications of infertility, especially in those with unexplained infertility, as well as the cost-effectiveness of the ICSI-for-all strategy. Also, we covered current evidence on the short- and long-term safety of children born thanks to ICSI-aided conception. Further well-designed, adequately powered, and randomized controlled clinical trials are absolutely needed to arrive at a consensus on the use of ICSI over c-IVF in different populations.

Reactive oxygen species in reproduction: harmful, essential or both?

The process of embryonic development is crucial and radically influences preimplantation embryo competence. It involves oocyte maturation, fertilization, cell division and blastulation and is characterized by different key phases that have major influences on embryo quality. Each stage of the process of preimplantation embryonic development is led by important signalling pathways that include very many regulatory molecules, such as primary and secondary messengers. Many studies, both in vivo and in vitro, have shown the importance of the contribution of reactive oxygen species (ROS) as important second messengers in embryo development. ROS may originate from embryo metabolism and/or oocyte/embryo surroundings, and their effect on embryonic development is highly variable, depending on the needs of the embryo at each stage of development and on their environment (in vivo or under in vitro culture conditions). Other studies have also shown the deleterious effects of ROS in embryo development, when cellular tissue production overwhelms antioxidant production, leading to oxidative stress. This stress is known to be the cause of many cellular alterations, such as protein, lipid, and DNA damage. Considering that the same ROS level can have a deleterious effect on the fertilizing oocyte or embryo at certain stages, and a positive effect at another stage of the development process, further studies need to be carried out to determine the rate of ROS that benefits the embryo and from what rate it starts to be harmful, this measured at each key phase of embryonic development.

ICSI does not improve reproductive outcomes in autologous ovarian response cycles with non-male factor subfertility

STUDY QUESTION

Does the method of fertilisation improve reproductive outcomes in poor ovarian response (POR) cycles when compared to all other ovarian response categories in the absence of male factor subfertility?

SUMMARY ANSWER

ICSI does not confer any benefit in improving the clinical pregnancy or live birth (LB) outcome in autologous ovarian response cycles in the absence of male factor subfertility when compared to IVF.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

ICSI is associated with an improved outcome when compared to IVF in patients with severe male factor subfertility.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A retrospective study involving 1 376 454 ART cycles, of which 569 605 (41.4%) cycles fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria for all autologous ovarian response categories: 272 433 (47.8%) IVF cycles and 297 172 (52.2%) ICSI cycles. Of these, the POR cohort represented 62 641 stimulated fresh cycles (11.0%): 33 436 (53.4%) IVF cycles and 29 205 (46.6%) ICSI cycles.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHOD

All cycles recorded on the anonymised Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) registry database between 1991 and 2016 were analysed. All fresh cycles with normal sperm parameters, performed after 1998 were included: frozen cycles, donor oocyte and sperm usage, intrauterine insemination cycles, preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) for aneuploidies (PGT-A), PGT for monogenic/single gene defects (PGT-M), PGT for chromosomal structural arrangements (PGT-SR) cycles, where the reason for stimulation was for storage and unstimulated cycles were excluded.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

ICSI did not confer any benefit in improving the LB outcome when compared to conventional IVF per treatment cycle (PTC), when adjusted for female age, number of previous ART treatment cycles, number of previous live births through ART, oocyte yield, stage of transfer, method of fertilisation and number of embryos transferred in the POR cohort (adjusted odds ratio [a OR] 1.03, 99.5% confidence interval [CI] 0.96–1.11, P = 0.261) and all autologous ovarian response categories (aOR 1.00, 99.5% CI 0.98–1.02, P = 0.900). The mean fertilisation rate was statistically lower for IVF treatment cycles (64.7%) when compared to ICSI treatment cycles (67.2%) in the POR cohort (mean difference −2.5%, 99.5% CI −3.3 to −1.6, P &lt; 0.001). The failed fertilisation rate was marginally higher in IVF treatment cycles (17.3%, 95% binomial exact 16.9 to 17.7%) when compared to ICSI treatment cycles (17.0%, 95% binomial exact 16.6 to 17.4%); however, this did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.199). The results followed a similar trend when analysed for all autologous ovarian response categories with a higher rate of failed fertilisation in IVF treatment cycles (4.8%, 95% binomial exact 4.7 to 4.9%) when compared to ICSI treatment cycles (3.2%, 95% binomial exact 3.1 to 3.3%) (P &lt; 0.001).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The quality of data is reliant on the reporting system. Furthermore, success rates through ART have improved since 1991, with an increased number of blastocyst-stage embryo transfers. The inability to link the treatment cycle to the individual patient meant that we were unable to calculate the cumulative LB outcome per patient.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This is the largest study to date which evaluates the impact of method of fertilisation in the POR patient and compares this to all autologous ovarian response categories. The results demonstrate that ICSI does not confer any benefit in improving reproductive outcomes in the absence of male factor subfertility, with no improvement seen in the clinical pregnancy or LB outcomes following a fresh treatment cycle.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The study received no funding. C.M.B. is a member of the independent data monitoring group for a clinical endometriosis trial by ObsEva. He is on the scientific advisory board for Myovant and medical advisory board for Flo Health. He has received research grants from Bayer AG, MDNA Life Sciences, Volition Rx and Roche Diagnostics as well as from Wellbeing of Women, Medical Research Council UK, the NIH, the UK National Institute for Health Research and the European Union. He is the current Chair of the Endometriosis Guideline Development Group for ESHRE and was a co-opted member of the Endometriosis Guideline Group by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). I.G. has received research grants from Bayer AG, Wellbeing of Women, the European Union and Finox.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Not applicable.

Comparison of the assisted reproductive technology outcomes between conventional IVF and ICSI with donor oocytes in normozoospermic patients

There is no evidence for the superiority of conventional in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) using donor oocytes. This retrospective descriptive study aimed to compare the outcomes of conventional IVF (n = 506) and ICSI (n = 613) with donor oocytes in (n = 968) normozoospermic patients. Although the fertilization rate was statistically higher in the ICSI group (p < 0.001), conventional IVF provided better results than ICSI with respect to embryo quality (number of grade A embryos, p < 0.001). In addition, we observed more blastocysts in the conventional IVF group (p < 0.001) and more good quality embryos were obtained for cryopreservation compared to ICSI (p < 0.001). Regarding clinical results, there were no statistical significant differences in the positive pregnancy test, clinical pregnancy and clinical miscarriage rates between IVF and ICSI. However, the implantation rate was statistically higher when IVF was performed (50.4% vs. 43.0%, p = 0.031, OR (95% CI): 1.185 (1.050-2.530)). In conclusion, with the use of normozoospermic samples in our oocyte donation programme, IVF offers more embryo efficiency and increased implantation rates than ICSI.

ICSI Versus Conventional IVF in Women Aged 40 Years or More and Unexplained Infertility: A Retrospective Evaluation of 685 Cycles with Propensity Score Model

This study compared the cumulative live birth rates following Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) versus conventional in vitro fertilization (cIVF) in women aged 40 years or more and unexplained infertility. A cohort of 685 women undergoing either autologous conventional IVF or ICSI was retrospectively analyzed. The effects of conventional IVF or ICSI procedure on cumulative pregnancy and live birth rates were evaluated in univariate and in multivariable analysis. In order to reduce potential differences between women undergoing either IVF or ICSI and to obtain unbiased estimation of the treatment effect, propensity score was estimated. ICSI was performed in 307 couples (ICSI group), whereas cIVF was performed in 297 couples (cIVF group), resulting in 45 and 43 live deliveries, respectively. No differences were observed in morphological embryo quality, in the number of cleavage stage embryos, in the number of transferred embryos, and in the number of vitrified embryos. As for the clinical outcome, no differences were observed in pregnancy rate, cumulative pregnancy rate, live birth rate, cumulative live birth rate, and abortion rate. The present results suggest that ICSI is not associated with increased likelihood of a live birth for unexplained, non-male factor infertility, in women aged 40 years or more.

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection for male infertility and consequences for offspring

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) has become the most commonly used method of fertilization in assisted reproductive technology. The primary reasons for its popularity stem from its effectiveness, the standardization of the procedure, which means that it can easily be incorporated into the routine practice of fertility centres worldwide, and the fact that it can be used to treat virtually all forms of infertility. ICSI is the clear method of choice for overcoming untreatable severe male factor infertility, but its (over)use in other male and non-male factor infertility scenarios is not evidence-based. Despite all efforts to increase ICSI efficacy and safety through the application of advanced sperm retrieval and cryopreservation techniques, as well as methods for selecting sperm with better chromatin integrity, the overall pregnancy rates from infertile men remain suboptimal. Treating the underlying male infertility factor before ICSI seems to be a promising way to improve ICSI outcomes, but data remain limited. Information regarding the health of ICSI offspring has accumulated over the past 25 years, and there are reasons for concern as risks of congenital malformations, epigenetic disorders, chromosomal abnormalities, subfertility, cancer, delayed psychological and neurological development, and impaired cardiometabolic profile have been observed to be greater in infants born as a result of ICSI than in naturally conceived children. However, as subfertility probably influences the risk estimates, it remains to be determined to what extent the observed adverse outcomes are related to parental factors or associated with ICSI.

The effect of suboptimal semen parameters on male partner's ability to conceive. Is he really subfertile because the test says so?

Context:

In many developing countries, subfertility treatment is not covered by government-funded institutions. It is observed that healthcare providers incriminate male factor for subfertility even when only a slight deviation from presumed normal criteria is observed.

Aim:

This study aims to provide scientific evidence that pregnancies are possible at semen parameters that are below the generally accepted lower limits of normal.

Setting and Design:

This was a retrospective cohort study conducted from January 2014 to December 2018.

Materials and Methods:

During the study period, couples who conceived without any treatment of male partner were included. The World Health Organization (WHO) reference values for semen analysis were utilized to assess the reports. The primary outcome measure was conception despite abnormal semen parameters.

Statistical Analysis Used:

Data were analyzed using the SPSS software program, version 15.0 (IBM, Armonk, USA).

Results:

Of the 332 couples included, 233 (70.1%) couples conceived despite suboptimal semen parameters, The most common criterion not satisfied was rapid linear motility –200 (85.8%), 87 (37.3%) men were oligozoospermic, 94 (40.3%) were asthenozoospermic, and 21 (9%) were teratozoospermic. The abnormalities were more common in men having primary subfertility (71.7% vs. 28.3%, P = 0.002). The abnormalities were most common in the age group 40–44 years (n = 91, 39.1%) and those who were overweight (n = 110, 47%).

Conclusions:

A consensus for defining poor semen criteria is the need of the hour so that these males can be counseled satisfactorily. WHO criteria are a standard commonly employed, but they do not necessarily predict the fertility potential.

ICSI treatment of severe male infertility can achieve prospective embryo quality compared with IVF of fertile donor sperm on sibling oocytes

Azoospermia, cryptozoospermia and necrospermia can markedly decrease the ability of males to achieve pregnancy in fertile females. However, patients with these severe conditions still have the option to be treated by intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) to become biological fathers. This study analyzed the fertilization ability and the developmental viabilities of the derived embryos after ICSI treatment of the sperm from these patients compared with in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment of the proven-fertile donor sperm on sibling oocytes as a control. On the day of oocyte retrieval, the number of sperm suitable for ICSI collected from two ejaculates or testicular sperm extraction was lower than the oocytes, and therefore, excess sibling oocytes were treated by IVF with donor sperm. From 72 couples (73 cycles), 1117 metaphase II oocytes were divided into 512 for ICSI and 605 for IVF. Compared with the control, husbands’ sperm produced a lower fertilization rate in nonobstructive azoospermia (65.4% vs 83.2%; P < 0.001), crytozoospermia (68.8% vs 75.5%; P < 0.05) and necrospermia (65.0% vs 85.2%; P < 0.05). The zygotes derived in nonobstructive azoospermia had a lower cleavage rate (96.4% vs 99.4%; P < 0.05), but the rate of resultant good-quality embryos was not different. Analysis of the rates of cleaved and good-quality embryos in crytozoospermia and necrospermia did not exhibit a significant difference from the control. In conclusion, although the sperm from severe male infertility reduced the fertilization ability, the derived embryos had potential developmental viabilities that might be predictive for the expected clinical outcomes.