RESUMO
Background: Although the depth of the counting chamber is an important factor influ-encing sperm counting, no research has yet been reported on the measurement and comparison of the depth of the chamber. We measured the exact depths of six kinds of sperm counting chambers and evaluated their accuracy
Materials and Methods: In this prospective study, the depths of six kinds of sperm counting chambers for both manual and computer-aided semen analyses, including Makler [n=24], Macro [n=32], Geoffrey [n=34], GoldCyto [n=20], Leja [n=20] and Cell-VU [n=20], were measured with the Filmetrics F20 Spectral Reflectance Thin-Film Measurement System, then the mean depth, the range and the coefficient of variation [CV] of each chamber, and the mean depth, relative deviation and acceptability of each kind of chamber were calculated by the closeness to the nominal value. Among the 24 Makler chambers, 5 were new and 19 were used, and the other five kinds were all new chambers
Results: The depths [mean +/- SD, ?m] of Makler [new], Macro and Geoffrey chambers were 11.07 +/- 0.41, 10.19 +/- 0.48 and 10.00 +/- 0.28, respectively, while those of GoldCyto, Leja and Cell-VU chambers were 23.76 +/- 2.15, 20.49 +/- 0.22 and 24.22 +/- 2.58, respectively. The acceptability of Geoffrey chambers was the highest [94.12%], followed by Macro [65.63%], Leja [35%] and Makler [20%], while that of the other two kinds and the used Makler chamber was zero
Conclusion: There existed some difference between the actual depth and the corresponding nominal value for sperm counting chambers, and the overall acceptability was very low. Moreover, the abrasion caused by the long use, as of Makler chamber, for example, may result in unacceptability of the chamber. In order to ensure the accuracy and repeatability of sperm concentration results, the depth of the sperm counting chamber must be checked regularly
RESUMO
<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To investigate the influence of the depth of the sperm counting chamber on sperm motility.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>We measured the depths of sperm counting chambers using the Filmetrics F20 Spectral Reflectance Thin-Film Measurement System. Then, according to the WHO5 manual, we analyzed 36 semen samples for the percentages of progressively motile sperm (PR) and non-progressively motile sperm (NP) and sperm motility (PR + NP) with the Ruiqi CFT-9201 computer-aided sperm analysis system, and compared the results of analysis.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The depths of the 4 sperm counting chambers were 9.8, 12.7, 15.7 and 19.9 microm, respectively, and the obtained PR were (44.00 +/- 11.63), (41.96 +/- 12.62), (40.86 +/- 11.71) and (37.78 +/- 11.38)%, NP (13.54 +/- 3.01), (14.13 +/- 2.94), (14.91 +/- 3.02) and (16.53 +/- 2.77)%, and sperm motility (57.53 +/- 11.06), (56.08 +/- 11.97), (55.78 +/- 11.55) and (54.31 +/- 12.11)% from the 4 chambers, respectively. The depth of the sperm counting chamber was correlated negatively with PR (r = -0.993, P < 0.05) and sperm motility (r = -0.978, P < 0.05), but positively with NP (r = 0.989, P < 0.05). There were statistically significant differences between the 9.8 microm and 19.9 microm deep chambers in PR and NP (P < 0.05) though not in sperm motility among the 4 chambers of different depths.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>The impact of the depth of the sperm counting chamber on sperm motility should not be ignored, for the deviation of the results from the chambers of different depths may lead clinicians to incorrect diagnosis and consequently inappropriate therapeutic approaches. Different reference ranges of sperm motility need to be normalized in correspondence to the depths of sperm counting chambers.</p>