1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(01)63888-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Semen Parameters in a Fertile Versus Subfertile Population: A Need for Change in the Interpretation of Semen Testing

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

7
120
1
5

Year Published

2000
2000
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 78 publications
(133 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
7
120
1
5
Order By: Relevance
“…The interpretation of these results, regarding the chance of conception for all male lupus patients classified as subfertile in the present study, is hampered by the recent debate concerning the cutoff values for normality in these 2 conventional techniques of semen evaluation. In fact, they do not seem to be the ideal assessment of male fertility potential, and reductions in the cutoff points have been proposed for WHO guidelines and Kruger strict criteria morphology (30)(31)(32).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The interpretation of these results, regarding the chance of conception for all male lupus patients classified as subfertile in the present study, is hampered by the recent debate concerning the cutoff values for normality in these 2 conventional techniques of semen evaluation. In fact, they do not seem to be the ideal assessment of male fertility potential, and reductions in the cutoff points have been proposed for WHO guidelines and Kruger strict criteria morphology (30)(31)(32).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies by Ombelet et al 16 using receiver-operating characteristics curve obtained a threshold value of sperm morphology of 10% as minimum requirement for fertility in a group of patients in Belgium. More recently, Gunalp et al 17 similarly applied the receiver-operating characteristics curve and positive-and negative-predictive values on semen collected from a population in Turkey and proposed that threshold values of 5% morphology, 14% progressive motility, 30% motility and a concentration sperm count of 9xl0 6 /mL should be considered as the minimum limit for fertility in men.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A spontaneous pregnancy rate of 20.2% (18/89) was observed after 1 year without treatment. An analysis of sperm morphology, as evaluated by [23,29,31] In vivo pregnancies 20 10 3 Kruger et al [32,33] IVF fertilization rates Initial published intervals ≥ 15 14-4 ≤ 3 Intervals as used in practice ≥ 15 14-5 ≤ 4 Eggert-Kruse et al [34] In vivo pregnancies 14 7 4 Ombelet et al [35] Tenth percentile Fertile population 10 ROC curve analysis Fertile vs. subfertile 5 Zinaman et al [36] Healthy couples 8 Günalp et al [38] Fertile vs. [39] Fertile vs. subfertile > 12 9-12 < 9 Haugen et al [40] Tenth [35] compared the semen parameters of 144 males from couples, in whom the wives had achieved a recent pregnancy within 12 months of unprotected intercourse. The subfertile group consisted of 143 consecutive men attending the infertility clinic during the same period, who did not achieve a pregnancy.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Like Ombelet et al [35], Menkveld et al [37] compared the semen parameters of a fertile and subfertile population. The fertile population comprised a group of 107 healthy males without any history of fertility problems, the partners of whom had a spontaneous pregnancy within 1 year of unprotected intercourse and were pregnant at the time the husband was included into the study.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%