Sperm motility in asthenozoospermic semen samples can be improved by incubation in a continuous single culture medium (CSCM®).

Standard protocols for clinical in vitro fertilization (IVF) laboratories recommend incubating semen at 37°C in 5% CO2 without strictly specifying which medium should be used or for how long. This study aimed to test the most common different incubation media used in Latin American andrology and micromanipulation laboratories and verify which, if any, is the most appropriate medium to improve asthenozoospermic semen samples' motility in the infertile male population. Ejaculates (136) collected from asthenozoospermic men were divided into two cohorts with similar characteristics (cohort 1; n = 28 and cohort 2; n = 108). Cohort 1 was used to evaluate the optimal incubation time with regard to unprepared asthenozoospermic sample sperm motility. After defining an optimal incubation period of 2 h, cohort 2 was used to evaluate which of the four media commonly used in IVF clinics (continuous single culture medium = CSCM®; SpermRinse medium = SR®; in vitro fertilization medium = G-IVF® and human tubal fluid medium = HTF®) was preferred for semen samples from asthenozoospermic patients. Overall, it was determined that a 2-h incubation in CSCM® medium led to the highest asthenozoospermic sperm motility. Thus, this simple, cost-effective, easily reproducible protocol could prove extremely useful for andrology laboratories working with IVF clinics dealing with asthenozoospermic semen specimens. This is particularly relevant since the incidence of the latter is on the rise as semen quality decreases around the globe.Abbreviations: ANOVA: Analysis of variance; ARTs: Assisted reproductive techniques; BWW: Biggers, Whitten, and Whittingham; CO2: Carbon dioxide; CPM: counted per minute; CSCM: Continuous Single Culture Medium; DAB: 3.3'- diaminobenzidine; DFI: DNA Fragmentation Index; DMSO: Dimethyl sulfoxide; G-IVF: In Vitro Fertilization Medium; GSH: Glutathione; GPx: glutathione peroxidase; HDS: High DNA Stainability; HSA: Human Serum Albumin; HTF: Human Tubal Fluid; HYP: Hyperactivity; ICSI: Intracytoplasmic sperm injection; IUI: Intrauterine insemination; IVF: in vitro fertilization; LIN: Linearity; ROS: Reactive Oxygen Species-level; SC: Sperm concentration; SCA: Sperm Computer Analysis; SCSA: Sperm Chromatin Structural Assay; SR: SpermRinse medium; SSS: Synthetic Serum Substitute; STR: Straightness; SOD: superoxide dismutase; TNE: Tris-Borate-EDTA; TSC: Total sperm count; VAP: Mean velocity; VCL: Curvilinear velocity; VSL: Linear velocity; WHO: World Health Organization; WOB: Wobble; spz: spermatozoa; AO: antioxidant.

[Application of PDCA circulation in reduction of the turnaround time of semen samples in the andrology laboratory].

OBJECTIVE: To reduce the out-of-threshold (OOT) value of the turnaround time (TAT) of semen samples in the andrology laboratory and improve the clinical diagnosis and patients' satisfaction. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the defect rate of TAT of semen samples in the andrology laboratory in the first two quarters of 2018. In the second two quarters, we made a table of countermeasures targeting the causes of the defects using plan-do-check-act (PDCA) circulation and the fishbone diagram drawn with the brainstorm method, followed by supervision of the implementation of the measures and observation of the changes in the OOT value of TAT of semen samples. RESULTS: The OOT rate of TAT of semen samples before seminal examination was significantly lower in the third and fourth than in the first and second quarters of 2018 (0.83% and 0.78% vs 3.43% and 2.07%, P < 0.01), and so was the total OOT rate of TAT (6.36% and 0.87% vs 7.00% and 7.15%, P < 0.01). The median of TAT of semen samples before computer assisted semen analysis was decreased from 22 min in the first to 17 min in the fourth quarter, and the 90th percentile from 54 min to 40 min. The median of total TAT in biochemical analysis was reduced from 387 min in the first to 315 min in the fourth quarter, and the 90th percentile from 1415 min to 1179 min. CONCLUSIONS: The application of PDCA circulation can significantly shorten the turnaround time of semen samples and improve the efficiency of diagnosis and treatment and quality control in the andrology laboratory.

[Biosafety in andrology laboratories during the outbreak of COVID-19].

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) broke out in December 2019 and has been rapidly escalating throughout the world. Clinical findings show that the patients with either symptomatic or asymptomatic COVID-19 can be a potential source of infection. Although respiratory droplets and close contact are considered to be the main routes of transmission, there is the possibility of aerosol transmission in a relatively closed environment. The nucleic acid of the novel coronavirus can be detected in nasopharyngeal swabs, sputum and other lower respiratory tract secretions, blood, feces, urine and so on, but whether it exists in the semen has not been confirmed. It is reported that the novel coronavirus may affect the testis that highly expresses angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and theoretically the semen is a possible carrier of the virus considering the fact that it is discharged from the same channel as the urine. Andrology laboratorians are exposed to most of the specimens above, including semen, and some open operations in the laboratory increase the risk of aerosol generation. Therefore, corresponding protective procedures are necessitated in andrology laboratories to reduce the risk of infection during the outbreak of COVID-19. Based on the knowledge and experience available as regards the pandemic and the characteristics of the work in the andrology laboratory, we summarize some biosafety points for andrology laboratorians to attend to during the outbreak of COVID-19.

Can the SCD test and terminal uridine nick-end labeling by flow cytometry technique (TUNEL/FCM) be used interchangeably to measure sperm DNA damage in routine laboratory practice?

BACKGROUND: Numerous tests have been proposed to evaluate sperm DNA integrity. To assess the sperm chromatin dispersion (SCD) test in an andrology laboratory, twenty-five men attending Clermont-Ferrand (France) University Hospital's Center for Reproductive Medicine were recruited. Sperm DNA damage was measured in the same semen samples using the SCD test and the Terminal Uridine Nick-end Labeling by flow cytometry technique (TUNEL/FCM) after density gradient centrifugation. RESULTS: SCD test reliability between readings, readers or slides was clearly established with very high agreement between measurements (Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) at 0.97, 0.95 and 0.98 respectively). Despite very good agreement between the SCD test and TUNEL/FCM (ICC at 0.94), the SCD test tended to slightly but significantly underestimate DNA damage compared with TUNEL (p = 0.0127). This systematic difference between the two techniques was - 3.39 ± 1.45% (mean ± SE). CONCLUSIONS: Andrology laboratories using the SCD test to measure sperm DNA damage need to know that it appears to give slightly underestimated measurements compared to TUNEL/FCM. However, this systematic underestimation is very small in amplitude. Both techniques give almost perfectly congruent results. Our study underlines the importance for each laboratory to validate its method to assess sperm DNA damage before implementing it in routine andrology lab practice.

CONTEXTE: Plusieurs tests sont disponibles pour évaluer l'intégrité de l'ADN spermatique. Afin d'évaluer l'applicabilité de la technique de dispersion de la chromatine spermatique (SCD) dans un laboratoire d'andrologie, nous avons recruté 25 patients pris en charge au Centre de Médecine de la Reproduction du centre hospitalo-universitaire de Clermont-Ferrand (France). L'altération de l'ADN spermatique a été mesurée en ayant recours au test SCD et au test Terminal Uridine Nick-end Labeling en cytométrie en flux (TUNEL/CMF) dans les mêmes échantillons pour les deux techniques, après avoir réalisé un gradient de densité. RÉSULTATS: Pour le test SCD, la concordance entre les lectures, les lecteurs et les lames a été clairement établie avec un accord quasiment parfait entre les mesures (Coefficient de corrélation intra-classe (CCI) respectivement à 0,97, 0,95 et 0,98). Malgré une bonne concordance entre le test SCD et le test TUNEL/CMF (CCI à 0,94), le test SCD tend à sous-estimer légèrement mais de façon significative l'altération de l'ADN spermatique en comparaison avec le test TUNEL (p = 0,0127). Cette différence systématique entre les 2 techniques était de − 3.39 ± 1.45% (moyenne ± erreur standard). CONCLUSIONS: les laboratoires d'andrologie utilisant le test SCD pour mesurer l'altération de l'ADN spermatique doivent savoir qu'il donne apparemment des valeurs légèrement sous-estimées en comparaison du test TUNEL/CMF. Cependant, cette sous-estimation systématique est. de faible amplitude et les deux techniques donnent des résultats presque parfaitement concordants dans notre étude. Cette dernière montre bien que chaque laboratoire doit valider sa méthode sur site pour évaluer l'altération de l'ADN spermatique avant de le mettre en place en pratique quotidienne en andrologie.

A multilaboratory study on the variability of bovine semen analysis.

To evaluate the variability of semen analysis, five replicates of 10 different bovine frozen semen batches were coded with different identification numbers and submitted to various laboratories for evaluation. Three studies were conducted: study I included eight laboratories in semen processing centers in the United States; study II included one laboratory in one semen processing center and five veterinary university laboratories in the United States; and study III included five veterinary university laboratories in Brazil. Evaluation methodology, sample classification criteria, and reporting format varied considerably among laboratories. There were laboratory effects (P < 0.05) on sperm concentration, motility, and morphology results in all studies. When Bland-Altman plots were evaluated, differences in sperm concentration were approximately between -5 and +5 × 10(6) sperm/mL in study I, when the same method of evaluation was used by all laboratories but ranged between -30 and +30 × 10(6) sperm/mL in studies II and III. Differences in the proportions of motile sperm were approximately -30% to +30%, and differences in the proportion of normal sperm were -15% to +15% in studies I and II; these differences were -15% to +15% and -10% to +10%, respectively, in study III. Mean absolute (one tail) proportional differences in estimates across all laboratories ranged from 9% to 31%, 16% to 37%, and 9% to 14% for sperm concentration, motile sperm, and normal sperm across studies; much larger (48%-86%) differences were observed for sperm abnormality categories. Intralaboratory and interlaboratory precision varied considerably across laboratories and seemed to be at least in part related to methods used for evaluation; precision was better when the NucleoCounter was used for evaluation of sperm concentration, whereas the use of computer-assisted sperm analysis for evaluation of sperm motility resulted in greater precision in some but not all laboratories. None of the laboratories that classified samples as satisfactory or unsatisfactory achieved complete consistency for all replicates within all batches. In addition, consistent classification among laboratories was observed for just three batches in studies II and III. These observations put the reliability of semen analysis in check and make it very difficult, if not impossible, to meaningfully interpret evaluation results.

Effect of varicocele on semen characteristics according to the new 2010 World Health Organization criteria: A systematic review and meta-analysis / 亚洲男科学杂志(英文版)

This study investigated the effects of varicocele on semen parameters in infertile men based on the new 2010 World Health Organization laboratory manual for the examination of human semen. Semen analysis results (volume, sperm count, motility, and morphology) were the primary outcomes. An electronic search to collect the data was conducted using the Medline/PubMed, SJU discover, and Google Scholar databases. We searched articles published from 2010 to August 2015, i.e., after the publication of the 2010 WHO manual. We included only those studies that reported the actual semen parameters of adult infertile men diagnosed with clinical varicocele and contained a control group of either fertile men or normozoospermic men who were not diagnosed with varicocele. Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis, involving 1232 men. Varicocele was associated with reduced sperm count (mean difference: -44.48 × 10 [6] ml-1 ; 95% CI: -61.45, -27.51 × 10 [6] ml-1 ; P < 0.001), motility (mean difference: -26.67%; 95% CI: -34.27, -19.08; P < 0.001), and morphology (mean difference: -19.68%; 95% CI: -29.28, -10.07; P < 0.001) but not semen volume (mean difference: -0.23 ml; 95% CI: -0.64, 0.17). Subgroup analyses indicated that the magnitude of effect was influenced by control subtype but not WHO laboratory manual edition used for semen assessment. We conclude that varicocele is a significant risk factor that negatively affects semen quality, but the observed pooled effect size on semen parameters does not seem to be affected by the WHO laboratory manual edition. Given most of the studies published after 2010 still utilized the 1999 manual for semen analysis, further research is required to fully understand the clinical implication of the 2010 WHO laboratory manual on the association between varicocele and semen parameters.