Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
  • Print publication year: 2010
  • Online publication date: May 2010

Chapter 3 - Basic semen analysis

References

1. KvistU, BjörndahlL, eds. Manual on Basic Semen Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2002.
2. MortimerD. Practical Laboratory Andrology. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1994.
3. PoundN, JavedMH, RubertoC, et al. Duration of sexual arousal predicts semen parameters for masturbatory ejaculates. Physiol Behav 2002; 76: 685–9.
4. ZavosPM, GoodpastureJC. Clinical improvements of specific seminal deficiencies via intercourse with a seminal collection device versus masturbation. Fertil Steril 1989; 51: 190–3.
5. KamischkeA, NieschlagE. Treatment of retrograde ejaculation and anejaculation. Hum Reprod Update 1999; 5: 448–74.
6. MacLeodJ, GoldRZ. The male factor in fertility and infertility. V. Effect of continence on semen quality. Fertil Steril 1952; 3: 297–315.
7. CarlsenE, AnderssonAM, PetersenJH, SkakkebaekNE. History of febrile illness and variation in semen quality. Hum Reprod 2003; 18: 2089–92.
8. CooperTG, BrazilC, SwanSH, OverstreetJW. Ejaculate volume is seriously underestimated when semen is pipetted or decanted into cylinders from the collection vessel. J Androl 2007; 28: 1–4.
9. BjörndahlL, KvistU. Sequence of ejaculation affects the spermatozoon as a carrier and its message. Reprod Biomed Online 2003; 7: 440–8.
10. MacLeodJ, GoldRZ. The male factor in fertility and infertility. III. An analysis of motile activity in the spermatozoa of 1000 fertile men and 1000 men in infertile marriage. Fertil Steril 1951; 2: 187–204.
11. World Health Organization. WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination of Human Semen and Sperm-Cervical Mucus Interaction. 4th edn. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press 1999.
12. MortimerD. Laboratory standards in routine clinical andrology. Reproductive Medicine Review 1994; 3: 97–111.
13. SiferC, SasportesT, BarraudV, et al. World Health Organization grade ‘a’ motility and zona-binding test accurately predict IVF outcome for mild male factor and unexplained infertilities. Hum Reprod 2005; 20: 2769–75.
14. VerheyenG, TournayeH, StaessenC, et al. Controlled comparison of conventional in-vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection in patients with asthenozoospermia. Hum Reprod 1999; 14: 2313–19.
15. Kirkman BrownJ, BjörndahlL. Evaluation of a disposable plastic Neubauer counting chamber for semen analysis. Fertil Steril 2009; 91: 627–31.
16. BjörndahlL, SöderlundI, JohanssonS, et al. Why the WHO recommendations for eosin-nigrosin staining techniques for human sperm vitality assessment must change. J Androl 2004; 25: 671–8.
17. BjörndahlL, SöderlundI, KvistU. Evaluation of the one-step eosin-nigrosin staining technique for human sperm vitality assessment. Hum Reprod 2003; 18: 813–16.
18. HühnerM. Methods of examining for spermatozoa in the diagnosis and treatment of sterility. Int J Surg 1921; 34: 91–100.
19. CaryWH. Sterility diagnosis: The study of sperm cell migration in female secretion and interpretation of findings. NY State J Med 1930; 30: 131–6.
20. CaryWH, HotchkissRS. Semen appraisal. A differential stain that advances the study of cell morphology. JAMA 1934; 102: 587–90.
21. MoenchGL, HoltH. Biometrical studies of head lengths of human spermatozoa. J Lab Clin Med 1932; 17: 297–316.
22. MenkveldR. An investigation of environmental influences on spermatogenesis and semen parameters. Ph.D. dissertation, Faculty of Medicine, University of Stellenbosch, South Africa, 1987.
23. MenkveldR, StanderFSH, KotzeTJ vW, et al. The evaluation of morphological characteristics of human spermatozoa according to stricter criteria. Hum Reprod 1990; 5: 586–92.
24. CoetzeeK, KrugerTF, LombardCJ. Predictive value of normal sperm morphology: a structured literature review. Hum Reprod Update 1998; 4: 73–82.
25. MenkveldR. Chapter 9. The basic semen analysis. In: OehningerS, KrugerTF, eds. Male Infertility. Oxon: Informa Healthcare 2007: 141–70.
26. PapanicolaouGN. A new procedure for staining vaginal smears. Science 1942; 95: 438–9.
27. OettléEE. Using a new acrosome stain to evaluate sperm morphology. Vet Med 1986; 81: 263–6.
28. World Health OrganizationWHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination of Human Semen and Sperm-Cervical Mucus Interaction. 3rd edn. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press 1992.
29. OettléEE, MenkveldR, SwansonRJ. Photographs with interpretations. In: MenkveldR, OettléEE, KrugerTF, et al., eds. Atlas of Human Sperm Morphology. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins 1991: 15–65.
30. CooperTG, YeungCH, FeticS, et al. Cytoplasmic droplets are normal structures of human sperm but are not well preserved by routine procedures for assessing sperm morphology. Hum Reprod 2004; 19: 2283–8.
31. KrugerTF, AcostaAA, SimmonsKF, et al. Predictive value of abnormal sperm morphology in in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1988; 49: 112–17.
32. SchaeferHE, FischerR. {Specific staining of eosinophilic granulocytes with Biebrich scarlet}. Klin Wochenschr 1968; 46: 396–7.
33. LacknerJ, SchatzlG, HorvathS, et al. Value of counting white blood cells (WBC) in semen samples to predict the presence of bacteria. Eur Urol 2006; 49: 148–52; discussion 52–3.
34. PunabM, LoivukeneK, KermesK, MandarR. The limit of leucocytospermia from the microbiological viewpoint. Andrologia 2003; 35: 271–8.
35. RodinDM, LaroneD, GoldsteinM. Relationship between semen cultures, leukospermia, and semen analysis in men undergoing fertility evaluation. Fertil Steril 2003; 79 Suppl 3: 1555–8.
36. BedfordJM, ZelikovskyG. Viability of spermatozoa in the human ejaculate after vasectomy. Fertil Steril 1979; 32: 460–3.
37. LewisEL, BrazilCK, OverstreetJW. Human sperm function in the ejaculate following vasectomy. Fertil Steril 1984; 42: 895–8.
38. JouannetP, DavidG. Evolution of the properties of semen immediately following vasectomy. Fertil Steril 1978; 29: 435–41.
39. HancockP, McLaughlinE. British Andrology Society guidelines for the assessment of post vasectomy semen samples (2002). J Clin Pathol 2002; 55: 812–16.