Microfluidic sperm selection yields higher sperm quality compared to conventional method in ICSI program: A pilot study

References

• Agarwal A, Cho CL, Esteves SC. 2016. Should we evaluate and treat sperm DNA fragmentation? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 28(3):164–171. doi:10.1097/gco.0000000000000271.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anbari F, Halvaei I, Nabi A, Ghazali S, Khalili MA, Johansson L. 2016. The quality of sperm preparation medium affects the motility, viability, and DNA integrity of human spermatozoa. J Hum Reprod Sci. 9(4):254–258. doi:10.4103/0974-1208.197691.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cassuto NG, Bouret D, Plouchart JM, Jellad S, Vanderzwalmen P, Balet R, Larue L, Barak Y. 2009. A new real-time morphology classification for human spermatozoa: a link for fertilization and improved embryo quality. Fertil Steril. 92(5):1616–1625. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.08.088.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Martin H, Cocuzza MS, Tiseo BC, Wood GJA, Miranda EP, Monteleone PAA, Soares JM Jr., Serafini PC, Srougi M, et al. 2017. Positive rheotaxis extended drop: a one-step procedure to select and recover sperm with mature chromatin for intracytoplasmic sperm injection. J Assist Reprod Genet. 34(12):1699–1708. doi:10.1007/s10815-017-1024-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Martin H, Miranda EP, Cocuzza MS, Monteleone PA. 2019. Density gradient centrifugation and swim-up for Icsi: useful, unsafe, or just unsuitable? J Assist Reprod Genet. 36(12):2421–2423. doi:10.1007/s10815-019-01602-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Facio CL, Previato LF, Machado-Paula LA, Matheus PC, Araujo EF. 2016. Comparison of two sperm processing techniques for low complexity assisted fertilization: sperm washing followed by swim-up and discontinuous density gradient centrifugation. JBRA Assist Reprod. 20(4):206–211. doi:10.5935/1518-0557.20160040.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faramarzi A, Khalili MA, Ashourzadeh S. 2017. Oocyte morphology and embryo morphokinetics in an intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection programme. is there a relationship? Zygote. 25(2):190–196. doi:10.1017/s0967199417000041.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghazali S, Talebi AR, Khalili MA, Aflatoonian A, Esfandiari N. 2015. Large nuclear vacuoles in spermatozoa negatively affect pregnancy rate in Ivf cycles. Iran J Reprod Med. 13(7):425–432.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gianaroli L, Magli MC, Ferraretti AP, Crippa A, Lappi M, Capitani S, Baccetti B. 2010. Birefringence characteristics in sperm heads allow for the selection of reacted spermatozoa for intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril. 93(3):807–813. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.10.024.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gode F, Bodur T, Gunturkun F, Gurbuz AS, Tamer B, Pala I, Isik AZ. 2019. Comparison of microfluid sperm sorting chip and density gradient methods for use in intrauterine insemination cycles. Fertil Steril. 112(5):842–848.e841. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.06.037.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halvaei I, Khalili MA, Razi MH, Agha-Rahimi A, Nottola SA. 2013. Impact of different embryo loading techniques on pregnancy rates in in vitro fertlization/embryo transfer cycles. J Hum Reprod Sci. 6(1):65–69. doi:10.4103/0974-1208.112385.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jayaraman V, Upadhya D, Narayan PK, Adiga SK. 2012. Sperm processing by swim-up and density gradient is effective in elimination of sperm with DNA damage. J Assist Reprod Genet. 29(6):557–563. doi:10.1007/s10815-012-9742-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Le Gac S, Nordhoff V, Venzac B. 2019. Microfluidic devices for gamete processing and analysis, fertilization and embryo culture and characterization. In: Applications of microfluidic systems in biology and medicine. Springer; p. 197–225.
   Google Scholar
• Li RQ, Ouyang NY, Ou SB, Ni RM, Mai MQ, Zhang QX, Yang DZ, Wang WJ. 2016. Does reducing gamete co-incubation time improve clinical outcomes: a retrospective study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 33(1):33–38. doi:10.1007/s10815-015-0618-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin M-H, Lee R-K-K, Li S-H, Lu C-H, Sun F-J, Hwu Y-M. 2008. Sperm chromatin structure assay parameters are not related to fertilization rates, embryo quality, and pregnancy rates in in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection, but might be related to spontaneous abortion rates. Fertil Steril. 90(2):352–359. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.06.018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mangoli E, Khalili MA. 2020. The beneficial role of intra cytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection (Imsi) in assisted reproduction. J Reprod Infertil. 21(1):3–10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mangoli E, Khalili MA, Talebi AR, Agha-Rahimi A, Soleimani M, Faramarzi A, Pourentezari M. 2019. Imsi procedure improves clinical outcomes and embryo morphokinetics in patients with different aetiologies of male infertility. Andrologia. 51(8):e13340. doi:10.1111/and.13340.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organization WH. 2010. Who laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen. World Health Organization.
   Google Scholar
• Parrella A, Keating D, Cheung S, Xie P, Stewart JD, Rosenwaks Z, Palermo GD. 2019. A treatment approach for couples with disrupted sperm DNA integrity and recurrent art failure. J Assist Reprod Genet. 36(10):2057–2066. doi:10.1007/s10815-019-01543-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pedrosa ML, Furtado MH, Ferreira MCF, Carneiro MM. 2020. Sperm selection in Ivf: the long and winding road from bench to bedside. JBRA Assist Reprod. doi:10.5935/1518-0557.20190081
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinn MM, Jalalian L, Ribeiro S, Ona K, Demirci U, Cedars MI, Rosen MP. 2018. Microfluidic sorting selects sperm for clinical use with reduced DNA damage compared to density gradient centrifugation with swim-up in split semen samples. Human Reprod. 33(8):1388–1393. doi:10.1093/humrep/dey239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rappa KL, Rodriguez HF, Hakkarainen GC, Anchan RM, Mutter GL, Asghar W. 2016. Sperm processing for advanced reproductive technologies: where are we today? Biotechnol Adv. 34(5):578–587. doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2016.01.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ricci G, Perticarari S, Boscolo R, Montico M, Guaschino S, Presani G. 2009. Semen preparation methods and sperm apoptosis: swim-up versus gradient-density centrifugation technique. Fertil Steril. 91(2):632–638. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.11.068.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sakkas D, Ramalingam M, Garrido N, Barratt CL. 2015. Sperm selection in natural conception: what can we learn from mother nature to improve assisted reproduction outcomes? Hum Reprod Update. 21(6):711–726. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmv042.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuel R, Feng H, Jafek A, Despain D, Jenkins T, Gale B. 2018. Microfluidic-based sperm sorting & analysis for treatment of male infertility. Transl Androl Urol. 7(Suppl 3):S336–s347. doi:10.21037/tau.2018.05.08.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shirota K, Yotsumoto F, Itoh H, Obama H, Hidaka N, Nakajima K, Miyamoto S. 2016. Separation efficiency of a microfluidic sperm sorter to minimize sperm DNA damage. Fertil Steril. 105(2):315–321.e311. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.10.023.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith GD, Takayama S, Swain JE. 2012. Rethinking in vitro embryo culture: new developments in culture platforms and potential to improve assisted reproductive technologies. Biol Reprod. 86(3):62, 61–10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tandara M, Bajic A, Tandara L, Bilic-Zulle L, Sunj M, Kozina V, Goluza T, Jukic M. 2014. Sperm DNA integrity testing: big halo is a good predictor of embryo quality and pregnancy after conventional Ivf. Andrology. 2(5):678–686. doi:10.1111/j.2047-2927.2014.00234.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tasoglu S, Safaee H, Zhang X, Kingsley JL, Catalano PN, Gurkan UA, Nureddin A, Kayaalp E, Anchan RM, Maas RL, et al. 2013. Exhaustion of racing sperm in nature-mimicking microfluidic channels during sorting. Small. 9(20):3374–3384. doi:10.1002/smll.201300020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Loendersloot LL, van Wely M, Limpens J, Bossuyt PM, Repping S, van der Veen F. 2010. Predictive factors in in vitro fertilization (Ivf): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 16(6):577–589. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmq015.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Virro MR, Larson-Cook KL, Evenson DP. 2004. Sperm chromatin structure assay (Scsa®) parameters are related to fertilization, blastocyst development, and ongoing pregnancy in in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles. Fertil Steril. 81(5):1289–1295. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.09.063.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yelumalai S, Kashir J, Jones C, Bagheri H, Oo SL, McLaren L, Coward K. 2012. Clinician-induced (Iatrogenic) damage incurred during human infertility treatment: detrimental effects of sperm selection methods and cryopreservation upon the viability, DNA integrity, and function of human sperm. Asian Pacific J Reprod. 1(1):69–75. doi:10.1016/S2305-0500(13)60052-4.
   Google Scholar
• Yetkinel S, Kilicdag EB, Aytac PC, Haydardedeoglu B, Simsek E, Cok T. 2019. Effects of the microfluidic chip technique in sperm selection for intracytoplasmic sperm injection for unexplained infertility: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Assist Reprod Genet. 36(3):403–409. doi:10.1007/s10815-018-1375-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yetunde I, Vasiliki M. 2013. Effects of advanced selection methods on sperm quality and art outcome. Minerva Ginecol. 65(5):487–496.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zhao F, Yang Q, Shi S, Luo X, Sun Y. 2016. Semen preparation methods and sperm telomere length: density gradient centrifugation versus the swim up procedure. Sci Rep. 6:39051. doi:10.1038/srep39051
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar