Dataset Information

Effects of Semen Processing on Sperm Function: Differences between Swim-Up and Density Gradient Centrifugation.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Andrology research has evolved notoriously in the latest years, particularly since male factor contribution to couple infertility has been undoubtedly demonstrated. However, sperm function investigations results are sometimes contradictory, probably as a result of the use of different sperm processing techniques. In this work, we underwent a systematic functional comparison of human sperm samples simultaneously processed by swim-up and density gradient centrifugation, which are the preferred sperm processing methods used in basic and clinical laboratories.

Materials and methods

To compare functional characteristics of sperm isolated by swim-up and density gradient centrifugation followed by incubation at different times under capacitating conditions.

Results

Semen samples processed in parallel by these two procedures resulted in sperm preparations with significant differences in redox state, spontaneous intracellular calcium oscillations, hyperactivation, protein tyrosine phosphorylation, and acrosome reaction responsivity to calcium ionophore. Such differences showed time-dependent specific patterns for spontaneous intracellular calcium oscillations, hyperactivation and protein tyrosine phosphorylation. Sperm retrieved by density gradient centrifugation showed more hyperactivation and tyrosine phosphorylation than swim-up sperm, suggesting a higher degree of capacitation.

Conclusions

Our results account for functional differences observed in spermatozoa processed with these two methods and therefore may contribute to a better interpretation of outcomes obtained in different laboratories as well as to improve experimental designs aimed to study sperm physiology and fertility potential.

SUBMITTER: Hernandez-Silva G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8443982 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Sperm preparation in IVF cycles using density gradient centrifugation (DGC) in combination with swim-up (SU) has been widely adopted in reproductive centres worldwide. It is a fact that the sperm recovery rate following one DGC from poor semen samples (showing liquefaction defects/containing too many unresolvable clots or rare sperm) is relatively low. Our results showed that double DGC (DDGC) is effective at increasing the sperm recovery rate from poor semen samples. However, DDGC may increase the mechanical stress of sperm, thereby potentially impairing embryo development. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the safety of using sperm prepared by DDGC/SU for IVF cycles. In this study, we retrospectively analysed the data generated from a total of 529 IVF cycles (from June 2017 to June 2018), and these IVF cycles contributed 622 transfer cycles (from June 2017 to December 2018) in Changzhou Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital. Of them, 306 IVF cycles and the related 355 transfer cycles (normal semen samples prepared by DGC/SU) were set as the normal group, while 223 IVF cycles and the related 267 transfer cycles (poor semen prepared by DDGC/SU) were set as the observation group. The main outcome measures, including the normal fertilization rate, top D3 embryo formation rate, blastocyte formation rate, clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate, birth weight and duration of pregnancy, were compared between the two groups. Compared to semen in the DGC/SU group, semen in the DDGC/SU group showed increased levels of the DNA fragmentation index (DFI) and reduced sperm concentration, percentage of progressive motility (PR) sperm, and percentage of normal morphology sperm. The indicators reflecting in vitro embryo development and clinical outcomes were similar in the DGC/SU group and DDGC/SU group, including the normal fertilization rate, top D3 embryo formation rate, blastocyte formation rate, pregnancy rate, implantation rate, spontaneous abortion rate, live birth rate, birth weight and duration of pregnancy. Furthermore, we found that the 1PN zygote formation rate was significantly lower in the DDGC/SU group than that in the DGC/SU group. We concluded that oocytes fertilized by sperm from poor semen samples separated by DDGC/SU achieved the same outcomes as oocytes fertilized by sperm from normal semen separated by DGC/SU, suggesting that DDGC/SU is an effective and safe method of sperm enrichment for poor semen samples in IVF. The main contribution of the present study is the verification of the effectiveness of DDGC/SU in improving sperm recovery from poor semen samples and the safety of using sperm prepared by DDGC/SU for IVF.