2019
DOI: 10.1007/s11934-019-0911-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sperm Morphology: History, Challenges, and Impact on Natural and Assisted Fertility

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
39
1
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
0
39
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Sperm morphology is more difficult to evaluate than sperm concentration or progressive motility, and there have been inconsistencies between different laboratories due to the subjective nature of the sperm morphological assessment (Gatimel, Mansoux, Moreau, Parinaud, & Léandri, 2017; Punjabi et al, 2016; Wang et al, 2014). With the progressive description of normal sperm and sperm abnormalities (Danis & Samplaski, 2019), the thresholds for the normal sperm morphology rate (NSMR) in different editions of the World Health Organization (WHO) laboratory manual for the examination of human semen have been revised over time; the NSMRs in the 3rd, 4th and 5th editions are ≥30% (World Health Organization 1992), >14% (World Health Organization 1999) and ≥4% (World Health Organization 2010) respectively.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sperm morphology is more difficult to evaluate than sperm concentration or progressive motility, and there have been inconsistencies between different laboratories due to the subjective nature of the sperm morphological assessment (Gatimel, Mansoux, Moreau, Parinaud, & Léandri, 2017; Punjabi et al, 2016; Wang et al, 2014). With the progressive description of normal sperm and sperm abnormalities (Danis & Samplaski, 2019), the thresholds for the normal sperm morphology rate (NSMR) in different editions of the World Health Organization (WHO) laboratory manual for the examination of human semen have been revised over time; the NSMRs in the 3rd, 4th and 5th editions are ≥30% (World Health Organization 1992), >14% (World Health Organization 1999) and ≥4% (World Health Organization 2010) respectively.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first is the retrospective design of the study. The second is we did not evaluate the correlation between sperm morphology and sORP due to high interobserver variability in the assessment of morphology and low predictive value of morphology for pregnancy success (24). Importantly, several reports found a negative correlation between oxidative stress and sperm morphology (13,25,26).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…It is worth noting that some studies advise couples with ≤4% normal sperm morphology to go for IVF or ICSI instead of IUI (12,30). On the contrary, there are other studies showing that sperm morphology has either no or low predictive value for pregnancy outcomes following IUI (14,15,31). Erdem et al pointed out that the predictive value of morphological assessment in unexplained infertility is not reliable, but in male subfertility, the percentage of normal sperm morphology after washing is higher than 4.5%, which increases the live birth rate (32).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the contrary, some other studies argued that the single/double IUI and cycle treatment options did not influence it significantly (1,10). On the other hand, abundant studies indicated that some semen parameters, such as semen volume, sperm motility, and morphology, could predict the pregnancy outcomes following IUI (8,(11)(12)(13); meanwhile, the other studies showed no significant prognostic value of these factors (14)(15)(16). In addition, some studies found that the combination of several influencing factors had the appreciable ability of prognostic classification (17).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%