Comparison of the effect of a combination of eight micronutrients versus a standard mono preparation on sperm parameters

Abstract

BackgroundThere are reports showing that l-carnitine alone or in combination with other micronutrients improve sperm parameters. However, comparative studies are still lacking. This study was carried out to compare the short term effects of a combination of eight micronutrients including l-carnitine vs. a mono-substance (l-carnitine alone) on sperm parameters.MethodsThis was a prospective, open-labelled, nonrandomized study that included male subjects (20 to 60 years) with at least 1 year of subfertility and at least one pathological semen analysis who received 3 months treatment with a mono-substance (500 mg l-carnitine/twice a day, n = 156) or a combined compound (440 mg l-carnitine + 250 mg l-arginine + 40 mg zinc + 120 mg vitamin E + 80 mg glutathione + 60 μg selenium + 15 mg coenzyme Q10 + 800 μg folic acid/once a day, n = 143) for the same time period. Sperm parameters were analyzed before and after treatment and groups comparisons performed.ResultsBaseline characteristics were similar among studied groups (age and body mass indices). Semen parameters (volume, density, overall progressive motility [including slow and fast motility]) and percentage of sperm with normal morphology improved after 3 months in both groups as compared to baseline. However, relative change (expressed as % increase of absolute values) for sperm density and overall progressive motility (including fast motility) was found to be higher for the combined micronutrient treatment group as compared to the mono-treatment using l-carnitine alone.ConclusionBoth analyzed groups displayed a positive short term effect on all sperm parameters; however effect on density and motility was significantly better for the combined formulation. There is need for more research in this matter that includes long term outcome data.Trial registrationRetrospectively registered at ISRCTN (7th October 2016). Study ID: ISRCTN48594239

Effect of Vitamin C, Vitamin E, Zinc, Selenium, and Coenzyme Q10 in Infertile Men with Idiopathic Oligoasthenozoospermia

“…15 In contrast, semen volume increased after combined antioxidant treatment for 3 months. 18 Sperm concentration significantly increased after 3 months of combined antioxidant treatment. These results are consistent with previous reports which showed an increment in sperm concentration after antioxidant supplement.…”

“…These results are consistent with previous reports which showed an increment in sperm concentration after antioxidant supplement. 10,[17][18][19][20] A recent study investigated the effect of combined micronutrients including vitamin E, zinc, selenium, and coenzyme Q10 for 3 months and reported increased sperm concentration in men with infertility. 18 Another study observed higher sperm density in men with idiopathic oligoasthenozoospermia after 6 months of treatment with vitamin E (400 mg/day) with or without clomiphene citrate.…”

“…10,[17][18][19][20] A recent study investigated the effect of combined micronutrients including vitamin E, zinc, selenium, and coenzyme Q10 for 3 months and reported increased sperm concentration in men with infertility. 18 Another study observed higher sperm density in men with idiopathic oligoasthenozoospermia after 6 months of treatment with vitamin E (400 mg/day) with or without clomiphene citrate. 20 Further, total sperm motility in infer-tile men was higher than those of fertile controls following daily administration of zinc sulfate for 3 months 10 and zinc correlated with sperm density in another study.…”

Benefits of Empiric Nutritional and Medical Therapy for Semen Parameters and Pregnancy and Live Birth Rates in Couples with Idiopathic Infertility: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

“…We identified 2 non-randomised studies, which were included in this SR [69,74]. We used ROBIN-I, a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions.…”

“…We used ROBIN-I, a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. Risk of Bias assessment of these two studies were judged critical [69,74]. Detailed results are available in Supplementary Table 3.…”