Vol 68, No 6 (2017)
Original paper
Published online: 2017-09-22

open access

Page views 1329
Article views/downloads 1339
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

The quality of semen among a sample of young, healthy men from Lower Silesia (AndroLS)

Marek Mędraś, Felicja Lwow, Paweł Jóźków, Leszek Szmigiero, Aleksandra Zagrodna, Ewa Zagocka, Małgorzata Słowińska-Lisowska
Pubmed: 29022649
Endokrynol Pol 2017;68(6):668-675.


Introduction: Contrary to other parts of the continent, little information is available regarding semen quality among subjects from central and eastern Europe. Material and methods: We evaluated semen profiles among a sample of men from an industrialised region of Poland. We directly invited 5000 healthy inhabitants of the region (aged 18–35 years; with unchecked fecundity) to participate in the study. Among the 500 who were eligible and willing to participate, we acquired detailed information and semen and blood samples from 177 subjects. Results: Semen volume, sperm concentration, and total sperm count were, respectively, (mean ± SD): 3.1 ± 1.5 ml, 60 ± 44 x 106/ml and 170 ± 137 x 106/ml. Percentage of normal forms was 14.7 ± 6.5%. Conclusions: Due to the relatively low sperm motility (mean ± SD: 54 ± 16%) and vitality (mean ± SD: 60 ± 15%) values, these variables require special attention during routine evaluations. The WHO 2010 criteria for these two parameters were met in only 60% and 66% of the samples, respectively. Further studies on men with different educational levels, social environments, or living conditions are needed to confirm our results.  

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file


  1. Carlsen E, Giwercman A, Keiding N, et al. Evidence for decreasing quality of semen during past 50 years. BMJ. 1992; 305(6854): 609–613.
  2. Skakkebaek NE, Rajpert-De Meyts E, Main KM. Testicular dysgenesis syndrome: an increasingly common developmental disorder with environmental aspects. Hum Reprod. 2001; 16(5): 972–978.
  3. Splingart C, Frapsauce C, Veau S, et al. Semen variation in a population of fertile donors: evaluation in a French centre over a 34-year period. Int J Androl. 2012; 35(3): 467–474.
  4. Brugo-Olmedo S, Chillik C, Kopelman S. Definition and causes of infertility. Reprod Biomed Online. 2001; 2(1): 41–53.
  5. Jørgensen N, Joensen UN, Jensen TK, et al. Human semen quality in the new millennium: a prospective cross-sectional population-based study of 4867 men. BMJ Open. 2012; 2(4).
  6. Jørgensen N, Carlsen E, Nermoen I, et al. East-West gradient in semen quality in the Nordic-Baltic area: a study of men from the general population in Denmark, Norway, Estonia and Finland. Hum Reprod. 2002; 17(8): 2199–2208.
  7. Paasch U, Salzbrunn A, Glander HJ, et al. Semen quality in sub-fertile range for a significant proportion of young men from the general German population: a co-ordinated, controlled study of 791 men from Hamburg and Leipzig. Int J Androl. 2008; 31(2): 93–102.
  8. Punab M, Zilaitiene B, Jørgensen N, et al. Regional differences in semen qualities in the Baltic region. Int J Androl. 2002; 25(4): 243–252.
  9. Kamieniczna M, Fraczek M, Malcher A, et al. Semen Quality, Hormonal Levels, and Androgen Receptor Gene Polymorphisms in a Population of Young Male Volunteers from Two Different Regions of Poland. Med Sci Monit. 2015; 21: 2494–2504.
  10. Swan SH, Brazil C, Drobnis EZ, et al. Study For Future Families Research Group. Geographic differences in semen quality of fertile U.S. males. Environ Health Perspect. 2003; 111(4): 414–420.
  11. Swan SH, Elkin EP, Fenster L. The question of declining sperm density revisited: an analysis of 101 studies published 1934-1996. Environ Health Perspect. 2000; 108(10): 961–966.
  12. Cooper TG, Noonan E, von Eckardstein S, et al. World Health Organization reference values for human semen characteristics. Hum Reprod Update. 2010; 16(3): 231–245.
  13. Jurewicz J, Radwan M, Sobala W, et al. Lifestyle and semen quality: role of modifiable risk factors. Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2014; 60(1): 43–51.
  14. Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjöström M, et al. International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003; 35(8): 1381–1395.
  15. Haase A, Steptoe A, Sallis JF, et al. Leisure-time physical activity in university students from 23 countries: associations with health beliefs, risk awareness, and national economic development. Prev Med. 2004; 39(1): 182–190.
  16. Jassem J, Przewoźniak K, Zatoński W. Tobacco control in Poland-successes and challenges. Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2014; 3(5): 280–285.
  17. World Health Organization. WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen. Geneva, 2010.
  18. Axelsson J, Rylander L, Rignell-Hydbom A, et al. No secular trend over the last decade in sperm counts among Swedish men from the general population. Hum Reprod. 2011; 26(5): 1012–1016.
  19. Tielemans E, Burdorf A, te Velde E, et al. Sources of bias in studies among infertility clients. Am J Epidemiol. 2002; 156(1): 86–92.
  20. Selevan SG, Borkovec L, Slott VL, et al. Semen quality and reproductive health of young Czech men exposed to seasonal air pollution. Environ Health Perspect. 2000; 108(9): 887–894.
  21. Fernandez MF, Duran I, Olea N, et al. Semen quality and reproductive hormone levels in men from Southern Spain. Int J Androl. 2012; 35(1): 1–10.
  22. Mínguez-Alarcón L, Chavarro JE, Mendiola J, et al. Physical activity is not related to semen quality in young healthy men. Fertil Steril. 2014; 102(4): 1103–1109.
  23. Richiardi L, Bellocco R, Adami HO, et al. Testicular cancer incidence in eight northern European countries: secular and recent trends. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004; 13(12): 2157–2166.
  24. Gaskins AJ, Mendiola J, Afeiche M, et al. Physical activity and television watching in relation to semen quality in young men. Br J Sports Med. 2015; 49(4): 265–270.
  25. Yang H, Chen Q, Zhou N, et al. Lifestyles Associated With Human Semen Quality: Results From MARHCS Cohort Study in Chongqing, China. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015; 94(28): e1166.
  26. Jensen TK, Swan S, Jørgensen N, et al. Alcohol and male reproductive health: a cross-sectional study of 8344 healthy men from Europe and the USA. Hum Reprod. 2014; 29(8): 1801–1809.
  27. Homan GF, Davies M, Norman R. The impact of lifestyle factors on reproductive performance in the general population and those undergoing infertility treatment: a review. Hum Reprod Update. 2007; 13(3): 209–223.
  28. Tsujimura A, Matsumiya K, Takahashi T, et al. Effect of lifestyle factors on infertility in men. Arch Androl. 2004; 50(1): 15–17.
  29. López-Teijón M, Elbaile M, Alvarez JG. Geographical differences in semen quality in a population of young healthy volunteers from the different regions of Spain. Andrologia. 2008; 40(5): 318–328.
  30. Guzick DS, Overstreet JW, Factor-Litvak P, et al. National Cooperative Reproductive Medicine Network. Sperm morphology, motility, and concentration in fertile and infertile men. N Engl J Med. 2001; 345(19): 1388–1393.
  31. World Health Organization. WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination of Human Semen and Sperm-Cervical Mucus Interaction. 4th ed. Cambridge, UK, 1999.
  32. Sharpe RM. Environmental/lifestyle effects on spermatogenesis. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2010; 365(1546): 1697–1712.
  33. Gaur DS, Talekar MS, Pathak VP. Alcohol intake and cigarette smoking: impact of two major lifestyle factors on male fertility. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2010; 53(1): 35–40.
  34. Liu CY, Chou YC, Chao JCJ, et al. The Association between Dietary Patterns and Semen Quality in a General Asian Population of 7282 Males. PLoS One. 2015; 10(7): e0134224.
  35. Jensen TK, Jørgensen N, Asklund C, et al. Fertility treatment and reproductive health of male offspring: a study of 1,925 young men from the general population. Am J Epidemiol. 2007; 165(5): 583–590.
  36. Romero-Otero J, Medina-Polo J, García-Gómez B, et al. Semen Quality Assessment in Fertile Men in Madrid During the Last 3 Decades. Urology. 2015; 85(6): 1333–1338.
  37. Fisch H, Goluboff ET, Olson JH, et al. Semen analyses in 1,283 men from the United States over a 25-year period: no decline in quality. Fertil Steril. 1996; 65(5): 1009–1014.
  38. Rylander L, Wetterstrand B, Haugen TB, et al. Single semen analysis as a predictor of semen quality: clinical and epidemiological implications. Asian J Androl. 2009; 11(6): 723–730.