Objective To evaluate the sperm parameters in semen analysis and before/after preparation that can affect the clinical pregnancy rate after intrauterine insemination (IUI). Methods A single centre retrospective observational cohort study included 696 IUI cycles among couples in unexplained and male subfertility treated with gonadotrophins. Results The clinical pregnancy rate in women inseminated with 30×106/mL in the native semen was higher than those inseminated with＜15.0×106/mL or 15.0×106~29.9×106/mL (15.2% vs 6.1%, 8.3%, respectively)(P<0.05). When the motility in the native semen was 21%~30%, the clinical pregnancy rate after IUI was noted higher than those inseminated with semen motility of 11%~20% or＞30% (21.6% vs 4.2%, 12.6%, respectively)(P<0.05). The clinical pregnancy rate was influenced by total motile spermatozoa count in the native semen (TMSC) and inseminating motile count after washing (IMC), with the cut-off value of 10 million and 5 million, respectively. And 42.9% of sperm was evaluated with the same result in its morphology by 4 andrologists. There were no strong correlations between sperm parameters at the time of semen analysis and clinical pregnancy rates after IUI. By multivariate logistic regression analysis three factors were identified to be associated significantly with clinical pregnancy rate: the sperm concentration in the native semen, the number of preovulatory follicles (≥18 mm), and the endometrial thickness. Conclusions The concentration in the native semen is significantly associated with the clinical pregnancy rate after IUI and is an independent factor to affect IUI outcome. Various sperm parameters in semen analysis are not correlated with IUI outcome.
LI Qing, HU Shao-fei, WANG Li-hua, HUANG Yi, DENG Zhu-xiu, ZHU Mao-ling
. Impact of sperm parameters on the outcome of intrauterine insemination cycles [J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Anatomy, 2019
, 37(4)
: 436
-441
.
DOI: 10.13418/j.issn.1001-165x.2019.04.015
[1] Cohlen B, Bijkerk A, Van der Poel S, et al. IUI: review and systematic assessment of the evidence that supports global recommendations[J]. Hum Reprod Update, 2018, 24(3): 300-319.
[2] Van Voorhis BJ, Barnett M, Sparks AE, et al. Effect of the total motile sperm count on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of intrauterine insemination and in vitro fertilization[J]. Fertil Steril, 2001, 75(4): 661-668.
[3] Merviel P, Heraud MH, Grenier N, et al. Predictive factors for pregnancy after intrauterine insemination (IUI): an analysis of 1038 cycles and a review of the literature[J]. Fertil Steril, 2010 , 93(1): 79-88.
[4] Ombelet W, Dhont N, Thijssen A, et al. Semen quality and prediction of IUI success in male subfertility: a systematic review[J]. Reprod Biomed Online, 2014, 28(3): 300-309.
[5] Gatimel N, Moreau J, Parinaud J, et al. Sperm morphology: assessment, pathophysiology, clinical relevance, and state of the art in 2017[J]. Andrology, 2017, 5(5): 845-862.
[6] 世界卫生组织编, 谷翊群, 陈振文, 卢文红, 等译. 世界卫生组织人类精液检查与处理实验室手册[M]. 5版. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2011.
[7] Kruger TF, Menkveld R, Stander FS, et al. Sperm morphologic features as a prognostic factor in in vitro fertilization[J]. Fertil Steril, 1986, 46(6): 1118-1123.
[8] Van Waart J, Kruger TF, Lombard CJ, et al. Predictive value of normal sperm morphology in intrauterine insemination (IUI): a structured literature review[J]. Hum Reprod Update, 2001, 7(5): 495-500.
[9] Akl LD, Oliveira JB, Petersen CG, et al. Efficacy of the motile sperm organelle morphology examination (MSOME) in predicting pregnancy after intrauterine insemination[J]. Reprod Biol Endocrinol, 2011, 9(1): 120.
[10] Sun Y, Li B, Fan LQ, et al. Does sperm morphology affect the outcome of intrauterine insemination in patients with normal sperm concentration and motility[J]. Andrologia, 2012, 44(5): 299-304.
[11] Deveneau NE, Sinno O, Krause M, et al. Impact of sperm morphology on the likelihood of pregnancy after intrauterine insemination[J]. Fertil Steril, 2014, 102(6): 1584-1590.
[12]Lemmens L, Kos S, Beijer C, et al. Predictive value of sperm morphology and progressively motile sperm count for pregnancy outcomes in intrauterine insemination[J]. Fertil Steril, 2016, 105(6): 1462-1468.
[13] Dickey RP, Pyrzak R, Lu PY, et al. Comparison of the sperm quality necessary for successful intra-uterine insemination with World Health Organization threshold values for normal sperm[J]. Fertil Steril, 1999, 71(4): 684-689.
[14] Stone BA, Vargyas JM, Ringler GE, et al. Determinants of the outcome of intrauterine insemination: analysis of outcomes of 9963 consecutive cycles[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1999, 180(6): 1522-1534.
[15]Dorjpurev U, Kuwahara A, Yano Y, et al. Effect of semen characteristics on pregnancy rate following intrauterine insemination[J]. J Med Invest, 2011, 58(1-2): 127-133.
[16] Wainer R, Albert M, Dorion A, et al. Influence of the number of motile spermatozoa inseminated and of their morphology on the success of intrauterine insemination[J]. Human Reprod, 2004, 19(9): 2060-2065.
[17] Badawy A, Elnashar A, Eltotongy M. Effect of sperm morphology and number on success of intrauterine insemination[J]. Fertil Steril, 2009, 91(3): 777-781.
[18] Miller DC, Hollenbeck BK, Smith GD, et al. Processed total motile sperm count correlates with pregnancy outcome after intrauterine insemination[J]. Urology, 2002, 60(3): 497-501.
[19] Horvath PM, Bohrer M, Shelden RM, et al. The relationship of sperm parameters to cycle fecundity in superovulated women undergoing intrauterine insemination[J]. Fertil Steril, 1989, 52(2): 288-294.
[20] Ombelet W, Vandeput H, Van de Putte G, et al. Intrauterine insemination after ovarian stimulation with clomiphene citrate: predictive potential of inseminating motile count and sperm morphology[J]. Hum Reprod, 1997, 12(7): 1458-1463.
[21]Cao S, Zhao C, Zhang J, et al. A minimum number of motile spermatozoa are required for successful fertilisation through artificial intrauterine insemination with husband's spermatozoa[J]. Andrologia, 2014, 46(5): 529-534.
[22] Honda T, Tsutsumi M, Komoda F, et al. Acceptable pregnancy rate of unstimulated intrauterine insemination: a retrospective analysis of 17, 830 cycles[J]. Reprod Med Biol, 2015, 14(1): 27-32.
