Quality evaluation of 3 sperm counting chambers by computer-assisted sperm analysis system / 中华男科学杂志

ABSTRACT

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To compare 3 common sperm counting chambers by the computer-assisted sperm analysis (CASA) system and evaluate their precision in analyzing sperm density and motility.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>We used latex bead solution at (20 +/- 5) x 10(6)/ml as analogue semen samples and analyzed the samples with Makler, Leja and Microcell counting chambers, 30 times with each chamber. And the average (x +/- s) and the coefficient of variation of sperm density were calculated by the CASA system. Meanwhile 54 semen samples collected from the outpatients analyzed with the 3 sperm counting chambers by the CASA system for the rates of forward movement and motility of the sperm.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The averages of sperm density obtained with Makler, Leja and Microcell chambers were (25.90 +/- 3.97) x 10(6)/ml, (18.74 +/- 1.62) x 10(6)/ml and (20.35 +/- 2.55) x 10(6)/ml, the coefficients of variation were 15.31%, 8.64% and 12.54%, the rates of sperm forward movement were (46.54 +/- 17.09)%, (30.65 +/- 14.88)% and (30.49 +/- 13.21)%, and the rates of sperm motility were (59.75 +/- 16.12)%, (46.76 +/- 14.11)%, (43.11 +/- 14.02)% respectively. There were significant differences in average sperm density among the 3 groups (P < 0.05). The rates of sperm forward movement and motility obtained with the Makler chamber were significantly higher than those achieved with the Leja chamber and Microcell chamber (P < 0.05), but there were no significant differences between the latter two (P > 0.05).</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>The rates of sperm density obtained with the 3 sperm counting chambers differed significantly. In the analysis of sperm motility, a higher rate can be achieved with the coverslip-pressed chamber than the capillary-drawn chamber.</p>