Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T00:48:30.324Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Section VI - Male-factor Infertility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 November 2021

Edited by
Roy Homburg ,
Adam H. Balen  and
Robert F. Casper
Roy Homburg
Affiliation:
Homerton University Hospital, London
Adam H. Balen
Affiliation:
Leeds Centre for Reproductive Medicine
Robert F. Casper
Affiliation:
Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
50 Big Debates in Reproductive Medicine , pp. 179 - 193
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Carlsen, E, Giwercman, A, Keiding, N, Skakkebaek, NE. Evidence for decreasing quality of semen during past 50 years. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1992;48(3):200–2.Google Scholar
Bahadur, G, Ling, KLE, Katz, M. Statistical modelling reveals demography and time are the main contributing factors in global sperm count changes between 1938 and 1996. Hum Reprod. 1996;11(12):2635–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swan, SH, Elkin, EF, Fenster, L. Have sperm densities declined? A reanalysis of global trend data. Environ Health Perspect. 1997;105(11):1228–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levine, H, Jørgensen, N, Martino-Andrade, A, et al. Temporal trends in sperm count: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23(6):646–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mishra, P, Negi, MPS, Srivastava, M, et al. Decline in seminal quality in Indian men over the last 37 years. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2018;16:103. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-018-0425-z.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sengupta, P, Dutta, S, Krajewska-Kulak, E. The disappearing sperms: analysis of reports published between 1980 and 2015. Am J Men’s Health. 2017;11(4):1279–1304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

References

Carlsen, E, Giwercman, A, Keiding, N, Skakkebaek, NE. Evidence for decreasing quality of semen during past 50 years. Br Med J. 1992;305:609–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pacey, AA. Are sperm counts declining? Or did we just change of spectacles? Asian J Androl. 2013;15:187–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levine, H, Jørgensen, N, Martino-Andrade, A, et al. Temporal trends in sperm count: a systematic review and met-regression analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23:646–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Björndahl, L, Barratt, CL, Fraser, LR, Kvist, U, Mortimer, D. ESHRE basic semen analysis courses 1995–1999: immediate beneficial effects of standardized training. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:1299–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonde, JP, Ramlau-Hansen, CH, Olsen, J. Trends in sperm counts: the saga continues. Epidemiology. 2011;22:617–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

References

Simon, L, Zini, A, Dyachenko, A, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effect of sperm DNA damage on in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcome. Asian J Androl. 2017;19(1):80–90.Google ScholarPubMed
Smith, ADAC, Tilling, K, Nelson, SM, Lawlor, DA. Live-birth rate associated with repeat in vitro fertilization treatment cycles. JAMA. 2015;314:2654–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicopoullos, J, Vicens-Morton, A, Lewis, SEM. Novel use of COMET parameters of sperm DNA damage may increase its utility to diagnose male infertility and predict live births following both IVF and ICSI. Hum Reprod. 2019;34(10):1915–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smits, RM, Mackenzie-Proctor, R, Yazdani, A, et al. Antioxidants for male subfertility. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. March 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007411.pub4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, L, Gallos, ID, Conner, SJ, et al. The effect of sperm DNA fragmentation on miscarriage rates: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Rep. 2012;27:2908–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

References

Cooper, TG, Noonan, E, von Eckardstein, S, et al. World Health Organization reference values for human semen characteristics. Hum Reprod Update. 2010;May–June;16(3):231–45.Google ScholarPubMed
Zini, A, Sigman, M. Are tests of sperm DNA damage clinically useful? Pros and cons. J Androl. 2009 May–June;30(3):219–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Iuliis, GN, Thomson, LK, Mitchell, LA, et al. DNA damage in human spermatozoa is highly correlated with the efficiency of chromatin remodeling and the formation of 8-hydroxy-2’-deoxyguanosine, a marker of oxidative stress. Biol Reprod. 2009 Sept;81(3):517–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cissen, M, van Wely, M, Scholten, I, et al. Measuring sperm DNA fragmentation and clinical outcomes of medically assisted reproduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(11):e0165125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. The clinical utility of sperm DNA integrity testing: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(3):673–7.Google Scholar

References

Simon, L, Emery, BR, Carrell, DT, et al. Review: Diagnosis and impact of sperm DNA alterations in assisted reproduction. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet. 2017;44:38–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bradley, CK, McArthur, SJ, Gee, AJ, et al. Intervention improves assisted conception intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes for patients with high levels of sperm DNA fragmentation: a retrospective analysis. Andrology. 2016;4:903–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Esteves, SC, Roque, M, Bradley, CK, Carrido, N. Reproductive outcomes of testicular versus ejaculated sperm for intracytoplasmic sperm injection among men with high levels of DNA fragmentation in semen: systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2017;108:456–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ribas-Maynou, J, Benet, J. Single and double strand sperm DNA damage: different reproductive effects on male fertility. Genes. 2019;10(2):105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kumar, K, Lewis, S, Vinci, S, et al. Evaluation of sperm DNA quality in men presenting with testicular cancer and lymphoma using alkaline and neutral Comet assays. Andrology. 2018 Jan;6(1):230–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

References

Esteves, SC, Sánchez-Martin, F, Sánchez-Martin, P, et al. Comparison of reproductive outcome in oligozoospermic men with high sperm DNA fragmentation undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection with ejaculated and testicular sperm. Fertil Steril. 2015;104(6):1398–405.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greco, E, Scarselli, F, Iacobelli, M, et al. Efficient treatment of infertility due to sperm DNA damage by ICSI with testicular spermatozoa. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(1):226–30.Google ScholarPubMed
Halpern, JA, Schlegel, PN. Should a couple with failed in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection and increased sperm DNA fragmentation use testicular sperm for the next cycle? Eur Urol Focus. 2018;4(3):299–300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moskovtsev, SI, Alladin, N, Lo, KC, et al. A comparison of ejaculated and testicular spermatozoa aneuploidy rates in patients with high sperm DNA damage. Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2012;58(3):142–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Abhyankar, N, Kathrins, M, Niederberger, C. Use of testicular versus ejaculated sperm for intracytoplasmic sperm injection among men with cryptozoospermia: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(6):1469–75.e1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alharbi, M, Almarzouq, A, Zini, A. Sperm retrieval and intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes with testicular sperm aspiration in men with severe oligozoospermia and cryptozoospermia. Can Urol Assoc J. 2021;15(5):E272–5.Google ScholarPubMed
Awaga, HA, Bosdou, JK, Goulis, DG, et al. Testicular versus ejaculated spermatozoa for ICSI in patients without azoospermia: A systematic review. Reprod Biomed. Online, 2018;37(5):573–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×