open access

Ahead of Print
Research paper
Published online: 2021-08-03
Get Citation

Male factor infertility in the Comprehensive Procreational Health Protection Program at the University Hospital in Cracow

Iwona M. Gawron1, Rafal Baran1, Jacek Drabina1, Malgorzata Swornik1, Ewa Posadzka1, Robert Jach1
DOI: 10.5603/GP.a2021.0161
·
Pubmed: 34541638


Affiliations

  1. Collegium Medicum, Jagiellonian University, Cracow, Poland

open access

Ahead of Print
ORIGINAL PAPERS Gynecology
Published online: 2021-08-03

Abstract

Objectives: Quality of semen is one of the most important factors contributing to couples' chance of natural conception. There are many confirmed or potential factors that influence semen analysis results.

To estimate the incidence and analyze male factor infertility.

Material and methods: The retrospective observational study was in the Clinical Department of Gynecological Endocrinology and Gynecology, University Hospital in Krakow. The study included men from subfertile population, aged ≥ 18 years, without prior diagnosis and obvious cause of infertility, whose initial seminograms were used to characterize the population. Seminograms of men remaining in the follow-up were used to analyze the variability of sperm parameters in relation to lifestyle modification and the use of fertility supplements containing antioxidants. Control semen tests were performed at 1-3-month intervals.

Results: The study included 870 men. In 68.5% of men, at least one abnormal sperm parameter was found and 40.7% had complex sperm abnormalities. Averaged values of sperm parameters of men from subfertile couples were within the WHO reference ranges, except for the normal morphology, whose median was 3.8%. No significant differences in the selected sperm parameters after the implementation of conservative management were observed. The percentage of pregnancies not resulting from IVF in the follow-up population was 7.7%.

Conclusions: One semen sample is representative of an individual in the diagnostics of male infertility. Expectant management and lifestyle modification should not be proposed as first-line treatment when more effective procedures are available.

Abstract

Objectives: Quality of semen is one of the most important factors contributing to couples' chance of natural conception. There are many confirmed or potential factors that influence semen analysis results.

To estimate the incidence and analyze male factor infertility.

Material and methods: The retrospective observational study was in the Clinical Department of Gynecological Endocrinology and Gynecology, University Hospital in Krakow. The study included men from subfertile population, aged ≥ 18 years, without prior diagnosis and obvious cause of infertility, whose initial seminograms were used to characterize the population. Seminograms of men remaining in the follow-up were used to analyze the variability of sperm parameters in relation to lifestyle modification and the use of fertility supplements containing antioxidants. Control semen tests were performed at 1-3-month intervals.

Results: The study included 870 men. In 68.5% of men, at least one abnormal sperm parameter was found and 40.7% had complex sperm abnormalities. Averaged values of sperm parameters of men from subfertile couples were within the WHO reference ranges, except for the normal morphology, whose median was 3.8%. No significant differences in the selected sperm parameters after the implementation of conservative management were observed. The percentage of pregnancies not resulting from IVF in the follow-up population was 7.7%.

Conclusions: One semen sample is representative of an individual in the diagnostics of male infertility. Expectant management and lifestyle modification should not be proposed as first-line treatment when more effective procedures are available.

Get Citation

Keywords

male infertility; semen parameters; natural conception

About this article
Title

Male factor infertility in the Comprehensive Procreational Health Protection Program at the University Hospital in Cracow

Journal

Ginekologia Polska

Issue

Ahead of Print

Article type

Research paper

Published online

2021-08-03

DOI

10.5603/GP.a2021.0161

Pubmed

34541638

Keywords

male infertility
semen parameters
natural conception

Authors

Iwona M. Gawron
Rafal Baran
Jacek Drabina
Malgorzata Swornik
Ewa Posadzka
Robert Jach

References (29)
  1. Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, de Mouzon J, et al. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology, World Health Organization, International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology, World Health Organization. The International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) Revised Glossary on ART Terminology, 2009. Hum Reprod. 2009; 24(11): 2683–2687.
  2. Vander Borght M, Wyns C. Fertility and infertility: Definition and epidemiology. Clin Biochem. 2018; 62: 2–10.
  3. World Health Organization. WHO laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen, 5th ed. World Health Organization 2010.
  4. Buck Louis GM, Sundaram R, Schisterman EF, et al. Semen quality and time to pregnancy: the Longitudinal Investigation of Fertility and the Environment Study. Fertil Steril. 2014; 101(2): 453–462.
  5. Jungwirth A, Diemer T, Kopa Z, et al. European Association of Urology guidelines on Male Infertility: the 2018 update. European Association of Urology. 2018.
  6. Choy JT, Eisenberg ML. Male infertility as a window to health. Fertil Steril. 2018; 110(5): 810–814.
  7. Agarwal A, Parekh N, Panner Selvam MK, et al. Male Oxidative Stress Infertility (MOSI): Proposed Terminology and Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Idiopathic Male Infertility. World J Mens Health. 2019; 37(3): 296–312.
  8. Salonia A, Matloob R, Gallina A, et al. Are infertile men less healthy than fertile men? Results of a prospective case-control survey. Eur Urol. 2009; 56(6): 1025–1031.
  9. 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): 646–659.
  10. Virtanen HE, Jørgensen N, Toppari J. Semen quality in the 21 century. Nat Rev Urol. 2017; 14(2): 120–130.
  11. Aziz N, Buchan I, Taylor C, et al. The sperm deformity index: a reliable predictor of the outcome of oocyte fertilization in vitro. Fertil Steril. 1996; 66(6): 1000–1008.
  12. Ustawa z dnia 25 czerwca 2015 r. o leczeniu niepłodności. Dziennik Ustaw 2015 poz. 1087.
  13. Polskie Towarzystwo Medycyny Rozrodu i Embriologii. Stanowisko PTMRiE w sprawie wykonywania zawodu embriologa klinicznego w ośrodkach medycznie wspomaganej prokreacji oraz bankach komórek rozrodczych i zarodków w Polsce (22.06.2016 r.). http://www.ptmrie.org.pl/pliki/artykuly/Stanowisko%20PTMRiE%20w%20sprawie%20wykonywania%20zawodu%20embriologa%20klinicznego.pdf.
  14. De los Santos MJ, Apter S, Coticchio G, et al. ESHRE Guideline Group on Good Practice in IVF Labs. Revised guidelines for good practice in IVF laboratories (2015). Hum Reprod. 2016; 31(4): 685–686.
  15. Björndahl L. What is normal semen quality? On the use and abuse of reference limits for the interpretation of semen analysis results. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2011; 14(3): 179–186.
  16. Niederberger C, Pellicer A, Cohen J, et al. Introduction: IVF's 40th world birthday. Fertil Steril. 2018; 110(1): 4–324.e5.
  17. 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.
  18. Rengan AK, Agarwal A, van der Linde M, et al. An investigation of excess residual cytoplasm in human spermatozoa and its distinction from the cytoplasmic droplet. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2012; 10: 92.
  19. Hamada A, Esteves SC, Nizza M, et al. Unexplained male infertility: diagnosis and management. Int Braz J Urol. 2012; 38(5): 576–594.
  20. van de, Steures P, Eijkemans MJ, et al. Role of semen analysis in subfertile couples. Fertil Steril. 2011; 95: 1013–1019.
  21. Ramasamy R, Scovell JM, Kovac JR, et al. Fluorescence in situ hybridization detects increased sperm aneuploidy in men with recurrent pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril. 2015; 103(4): 906–909.e1.
  22. Esteves SC, Zini A, Aziz N, et al. Critical appraisal of World Health Organization's new reference values for human semen characteristics and effect on diagnosis and treatment of subfertile men. Urology. 2012; 79(1): 16–22.
  23. Turner KA, Rambhatla A, Schon S, et al. Male Infertility is a Women's Health Issue-Research and Clinical Evaluation of Male Infertility Is Needed. Cells. 2020; 9(4).
  24. Chiu YH, Edifor R, Rosner BA, et al. EARTH Study Team. What Does a Single Semen Sample Tell You? Implications for Male Factor Infertility Research. Am J Epidemiol. 2017; 186(8): 918–926.
  25. 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.
  26. Barratt CLR, Björndahl L, De Jonge CJ, et al. The diagnosis of male infertility: an analysis of the evidence to support the development of global WHO guidance-challenges and future research opportunities. Hum Reprod Update. 2017; 23(6): 660–680.
  27. Shiraishi K, Matsuyama H. Effects of medical comorbidity on male infertility and comorbidity treatment on spermatogenesis. Fertil Steril. 2018; 110(6): 1006–1011.e2.
  28. Efrat M, Stein A, Pinkas H, et al. Dietary patterns are positively associated with semen quality. Fertil Steril. 2018; 109(5): 809–816.
  29. Palermo G, Joris H, Devroey P, et al. Pregnancies after intracytoplasmic injection of single spermatozoon into an oocyte. Lancet. 1992; 340(8810): 17–18.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail:  viamedica@viamedica.pl