Effects of Percoll Discontinuous Density Gradients vs SpermPrep II vs Sephadex G-50 Gel Filtration on Semen Parameters.

Abstract

There are various methods of separating sperm from seminal plasma for subsequent intrauterine insemination (JUT) and for in vitro fertilization (IVF). The purpose of the present study was to assess and compare semen parameters following Sephadex, Percoll and SpermPrepTMII separation techniques. The SpermPrepTM II is also a Sephadex preparation but uses a different bead size, less Sephadex and is a quicker method. The specimens (n =16) were initially evaluated for count, (C; X 106/ml) % motility (MO), grade of motility (GR; %), and HOS test scores. Each specimen was then divided into 3 equal aliquots and prepared as follows : 1) layered onto a modified Percoll discontinuous density gradient column ; 2) processed using SpermPrepTMII ; and 3) filtered through a Sephadex gel filtration column (G-50). The results show all 3 treatments yielded lower (p <0.01) counts as compared to control values but no differences were noted among them. Percoll and SpermPrepTMII increased MO (p <0.01) where Sephadex reduced it (p =NS). Percoll and SpermPrepTMII improved the % of best quality sperm but not Sephadex with SpermPrepTMII being higher than Percoll. There were increases (p < 0.05) in 1105 values in all experimental treatments with SpermPrepTMII being the best. However, this study did not show as many males with 1105 scores below 50% as noted in other studies. Finally, Percoll and SpermPrepTMII seem equally effective methods for producing high quality sperm for JUT or IVF although SpermPrepTMII is quite faster.

A Comparison of New Sperm Preparation Technique by Glass Wool Filtration Combined With Pentoxifylline With Other Techniques in Asthenozoospermic Men.

“…These results were in agreement with other studies using culture medium for the separation and activation of sperm in vitro which based on the existence of the higher percentage of good motile sperms in these two methods compared with other methods The current study clarified that significant increase for the progressive sperm motility after when using GWF+PX technique as compared to the GWF techniques. Also, this study clarified that a significant increase for the same parameter postactivation when using the GWF technique as compared to the pre-activation [27][28][29][30].…”

Comparisons of sperm quality, morphometry and function among human sperm populations recovered via SpermPrep™ II filtration, swim-up and Percoll density gradient methods

“…The absence of significant differences in the LMP, ARHS/TSH ratio, and MWH between fractions recovered via the two above methods is an important finding since these three morphometric parameters have been considered as predictors of sperm fertilizing potential (Sofikitis et al, 1994). Check et al (1992) emphasized that the SP method is faster than the PDG method, and suggested the utility of the SP manipulative technique in assisted reproduction programs, especially in centers dealing with high numbers of infertile couples. However, the MLH has not been proven to strongly correlate with sperm fertilizing potential (Sofikitis et al, 1994).…”

“…However, the MLH has not been proven to strongly correlate with sperm fertilizing potential (Sofikitis et al, 1994). Check et al (1992) emphasized that the SP method is faster than the PDG method, and suggested the utility of the SP manipulative technique in assisted reproduction programs, especially in centers dealing with high numbers of infertile couples.…”

Two different timing of intra uterine insemination in patients of unexplained infertility: a randomized clinical trial

“…9 Two documented analyses were done before and after preparation. Women who fulfilled the criteria were inseminated with 0.5 to 1 ml of prepared semen.…”