Skip to main content
  • Spermiologie
  • Published:

Numération, mobilité, térastospermie et résultats en AMP

Sperm count, motility, morphology and results in medically assisted procreation

Resume

Depuis l’apparition des différentes méthodes de procréation assistée, les investigations se sont multipliées pour rechercher des corrélations entre les paramètres du spermes et sa fécondance. Dans cette revue, nous rapportons les résultats des travaux concernant les trois variables spermatiques les plus courament étudiées (numération, mobilité, morphologie) et leur relation aux résultats des différentes méthodes d’AMP (IIU, FIV, ICSI). Si l’étude des caractéristiques du spermogramme demeure l’examen de base dans l’évaluation de la fertilité, cependant, aucune de ces variables considerées separément, ne peut à elle seule présenter une valeur prédictive en raison du caractère multifactoriel du pouvoir fécondant du sperme. Les résultats parfois discordants rélevés dans la littérature, sont en partie dûs aux méthodes d’évaluation non-standardisées des caractéristiques du sperme. D’où la nécessité d’uniformiser les techniques d’analyse afin d’adopter un language commun et pouvoir comparer des résultats.

Abstract

Since the advent of different methods of medically assisted procreation, investigations have increased in search of correlations between sperm parameters and fertilization potential of spermatozoa. This review reports the results of correlations between the three most commonly studied sperm characteristics (sperm count, motility, morphology) and the outcome of different methods procreation (AI, IVF, ICSI). Although sperm analysis remains the basic investigation for the evaluation of fertility, none of the three variables, taken individually, can predict the fertilizing potential of a sample because of the multifactorial character of fertilization.

The contradictory results encountered sometimes in the litterature are partly due to non-standardized evaluation methods of sperm quality. Hence the necessity to standardize investigation techniques so as to use a common language and be able to compare results of different studies.

References

  1. Aitken RJ., Baker HWG., Irvine DS.: On the nature of semen quality and infertility. Hum. Reprod., 1995, 10: 247–252.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Barad DH., Lindheim SR., Zinger M., et al.: Sperm morphology predicts pregnancy more accurately after intra-uterine insemination than after IVF. American Society for Reproductive Medecine. Seattle, Washington 1995: Abstract P-275.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brasch JG., Rawlins R., Tarchala S., Radwanska E.: The relationship between total motile sperm count and the success of intra-uterine insemination. Fertil. Steril., 1994, 62: 150–154.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Burkman LJ.: Characterization of hyperactivated motility by human sperm during capacitation: comparison of fertile and oligozoospermic sperm populations. Arch. Androl., 1984, 13: 153–165.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Chaffkin L., Nulsen J., Luciano A., Metzger D.: A comparative analysis of the cycle fecundity rates associated with combined human menopausal gonadotropin (HMG) and intra-uterine insemination (IUI) versus either HMG or IUI alone. Fertil. Steril., 1991, 55: 252–256.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Check JH., Ballendorf A., Lee MA., Nazari A., Nowroozi K.: Correlation of computerized semen analysis with the successful fertilization of oocytes in an in vitro programme. Arch. Androl. 1990, 24: 229–234.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Delépine B., Abboud P., Melin MC., et al.: Insémination intra-utérine avec hyperstimulation dans les indications masculines. Contr. Fertil. Sex. 1996, 24: 891–896.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Di Marzo SJ., Kennedy JF., Young PE., et al.: Effect of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation on pregnancy rates after intra-uterine insemination. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 1992, 166: 1607–1613.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Duncan WW., Glew MJ., Wang XJ.: Predicting of in vitro fertilization rates from semen variables. Fertil. Steril. 1993, 59: 1233–1238.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Engisu ME., Dumoulin JCM., Pieters M., et al.: Evaluation of human sperm morphology using strict criteria after Diff-Quick staining: correlation of morphology with fertilization in vitro. Hum. Reprod. 1991, 6: 854–858.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Englert Y., Pussant F., Vekemans M., et al.: Higher foregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer in cases of sperm defects. Fertil. Steril. 1987, 48: 254–257.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Fetterolf PM., Rogers BJ.: Prediction of human sperm penetrating ability using computerized motion parameters. Molec. Reprod. Develop. 1990, 27: 326–331.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. FIVNAT 94: Les résultats de la FIV classique dans les hypofertilités masculines, préparé par Janny L, De Monzon F, Bachelot A, Amar-Rossin B. Contrac. Fertil. Sex., 1995, 23: 498–501.

    Google Scholar 

  14. FIVNAT: Bilan FIVNAT 1994. Contrac. Fertil. Sex., 1995, 23: 490–493.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Francavilla F., Romana R., Santucci R., Poccia G.: Effect of sperm morphology and sperm count on outcome of intra-uterine insemination in oligozoospermia and/or asthenozoospermia. Fertil. Steril., 1990, 53: 892–897.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Friedman AJ., Juneau-Norcross M., Sedensky B., Andrews N., Dorfman J., Cramer DW.: Life table analysis of intra-uterine insemination pregnancy rates for couples with cervical factor, male factor and idiopathic infertility. Fertil. Steril., 1991, 55: 1005–1007.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Giorgetti C., Hans E., Spach JL., Barbeault JM., Franquebalme JP., Roulier R.: Qualité du sperme et fécondation in vitro. Contr. Fert. Sex., 1990, 18: 633–635.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Grunert JH., De Geyter C., Nieschlag E.: Objective identification of hyperactivated human sperm by computerized sperm motion analysis with the Hamilton-Thorn sperm motility. Hum. Reprod. 1990, 5: 593–599.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Guérin JF., Gallot-Lavallee P., Lornage J. et al.: Echecs de FIV en relation avec un défaut d’hyperactivation des spermatozoïdes: indication de micro-injection? Contr. Fertil. Sex., 1995, 23: 466–467.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hinting A., Comhaire F., Vermeulen L.: Value of sperm characteristics and the results of in vitro fertilization for predicting the outcome of assisted reproduction. Int. J. Androl., 1990, 13: 59–66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Horvath P., Bohrer M., Shelden M., Kemman E.: The relationship of sperm parameters to cycle fecundity in superovulated women undergoing intra-uterine insemination. Fertil. Steril. 1989, 52: 288–294.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Karström PO., Bergh T., Lundkvist O.: A prospective randomized trial of artificial insemination versus intercourse in cycles stimulated with HMG or CC. Fertil. Steril., 1993, 59: 554–559.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kastar K., Franken DR., Vanderhorst G., Oehninger S., Kriger TF., Hodgen GD.: The relationship between morphology, motility and zona pellucida binding potential of human spermatozoa. Andrologia, 1994, 25: 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kolp LA., Hoeger KM., Rice DS., et al.: Effect of sperm morphology on conception rates after intrauterine insemination. American Society for Reproductive Medecine. Seattle, Washington 1995. Abstract O-122.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kruger TF., Acosta AA., Simmons KF., Swanson RJ., Matta JF., Oehninger S.: Predictive value of abnormal sperm morphology in in vitro fertilization. Fertil. Steril. 1988, 49: 112–117.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kruger TF., Du Toit TC., Franken DR., et al.: A new computerized method of reading sperm morphology (strict criteria) is as efficient as technician reading. Fertil. Steril. 1993, 59: 202–209.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Kruger TF., Laquet FA., Sanchez CA., et al.: A prospective study on the predictive value of normal sperm morphology as evaluated by computer (IVOS). Fertil. Steril., 1996, 66: 285–291.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Le Lannou D.: L’insémination intra-utérine, indication et résultats. Contr. Fert. Sex. 1994, 22: 361–369.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Liu DY., Lopata A., Johnston WIH, Baker HWG.: Human sperm-zona binding, sperm characteristics and in vitro fertilization. Hum. Reprod. 1989, 696–701.

  30. Marshburn P., Mc Intire D., Carr B., Byrd W.: Spermatozoal characteristics from fresh and frozen donor semen and their correlation with fertility outcome after intra-uterine insemination. Fertil. Steril. 1992, 58: 179–186.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Mathieu C., Ecochard R., Bied V.: Place de l’insémination artificielle avec sperme de conjoint (IAC) dans le traitement de l’hypofertilité masculine. Contr. Fert. Sex., 1992, 20: 716–719.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Mathieu C., Ecochard R., Bied V., Lornage J., Czyba JC.: Cumulative conception rate following intra-uterine insemination with husband’s spermatozoa: influence of husband’s age. Hum. Reprod. 1995, 10: 1090–1097.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Matorras R., Crgostegui B., Mandiola M., Mendoza R., Rodriguez-Escudero FJ.: Sperm morphology analysis (strict criteria) in male infertility is not a prognostic factor in intrauterine insemination with husbands’ sperm. Fertil. Steril., 1995, 63: 608–611.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Menkveld R., Rhemrev J.P.T., Franken D.R., Vermeiden J.P.W., Kruger T.F.: Acrosomal morphology as a novel criterion for male infertility diagnosis: relation with acrosin activity, morphology (strict criteria) and fertilization in-vitro. Fertil. Steril. 1996, 65: 637–644.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Menkveld R., Stander., Kotze T.J.: The evaluation of morphological characteristics of human spermatozoa using stricter criteria. Hum. Reprod., 1990, 5: 586–592.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Mortimer S.T., Mortimer D.: Kinematics of human sperm incubated under capacitating conditions. J. Androl. 1990, 11: 195–203.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Nagy Z.P., Liu J., Joris H et al.: The results of intracytoplasmic sperm injection is not related to any of the three basic sperm parameters. Hum. Reprod., 1995, 10: 1123–1129.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Nan P.M., Cohlen B.J., Te Velde E.R. et al.: Intrauterine insemination or intercourse after ovarian stimulation for male subfertility? A controlled study. Hum. Reprod., 1994, 9: 2022–2026.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Nulsen J., Walsh S., Dumez S., Metzer D.A.: A randomized and longitudinal study of HMG with IUI in the treatment of infertility. Obstet. Gynecol. 1993, 82: 780–786.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Oehninger S. Acosta A.A., Kruger T., Veeck L.L., Flood J., Jones H.W.: Failure of fertilization in in-vitro fertilisation: The “occult” male factor. J. Vitro Fert. Embryo Transfer. 1988, 5: 181–187.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Ombelet W., Cox A., Janssen M.: Intrauterine insemination- laboratory and clinical aspects: a review of 1100 cycles. Abstracts of the 10th Annual Meeting of ESHRE, Brussels 1994.

  42. Palermo G.D., Cohen J., Alikani M., Adler A., Rosenwaks Z.: Intracytoplasmic sperm injection: novel treatment for all forms of male factor infertility. Fertil. Steril. 1995, 63: 1231–1240.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Parinaud J., Vietez G., Moutaffian H., Richoilley G., Labal B.: Relevance of acrosome function in the evaluation of semen in-vitro fertilisation ability.: Fertil. Steril. 1995, 63: 598–603.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Parinaud J., Richoilley G., Moutaffian H., Vietez G., Mieusset R.: Are the characteristics of spermatozoa in the insemination medium useful for predicting in-vitro fertilization results? Int. J. Androl. 1996, 19: 103–108.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Pilikian S., Czyba J.C., Guerin J.F., Pinatel M.C., Adeleine P., Ecochard R.: Analyse fonctionnelle des spermes inféconds présentant une asthénozoospermie isolée. 10ème Congrès de la Société d’Andrologie de Langue Française. Octobre 29–31, 1992.

  46. Plosker S.M., Jacobson W., Amato P.: Predicting and optimizing success in an intrauterine insemination programm. Hum. Reprod. 1994, 9: 2014–2021.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Poussette A., Akerlof E., Rosenborg L., Fredricsson B.: Increase in progressive motility and improved morphology of human spermatozoa following their migration through Percoll gradients. Int. J. Androl, 1986, 9: 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Robertson L., Wolfe D.P., Tash J.S.: Temporal changes in motility parameters related to acrosomal status: identification ans characterisation of populations of hyperactivated human sperm. Biol. Reprod. 1988, 39: 797–805.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Royère D.: Stratégie des PMA en cas d’infertilité masculine: la fécondation in-vitro dans les cas d’altérations non specifiques du sperme. Contracept. Fertil. Sex., 1992, 20: 720–724.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Salat-Baroux J., Mandelbaum J., Antoine J.M. et al.: Indication de l’ICSI: Influence possible de la qualité ovocytaire sur les résultats. Contracept. Fertil. Sex., 1995, 23: 481–483.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Scemama H., Salat-Baroux J., Antoine J.M., Saada H., Cohen-Bacrie P.: L’hyperstimulation contrôlée du cycle associée à une IIU du sperme du conjoint. Gynecologie. 1993, 1: 125–131.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Schoysman R., Vanderzwalmen P., Nijs P. et al.: Pregnancy after fertilization with human testicular spermatozoa. Lancet 1993, 342: 1237.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Silber S., Nagy Z.P., Liu J., Godoy H., Devroey P., Van Steirteghem A.: Conventional in-vitro fertilization versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection-for patients requiring microsurgical sperm aspiration. Hum. Reprod. 1994, 9: 1705–1709.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Silber S., Van Steirteghem A., Liu J., Nagy Z., Tournaye H., Devroey P.: High fertilization and pregnancy rates after intracytoplasmic sperm injection with spermatozoa obtained from testicular biopsie. Hum. Reprod. 1995, 10: 148–152.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Sukcharoen N., Keith J., Irvine D.S., Aitken R.J.: Definition of the optimal criteria for identifying hyperactivated human spermatozoa at 25 Hz using in-vitro fertilization as a functional end-point. Hum. Reprod. 1995, 10: 2928–2937.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Wainer R., Merlet F., Bailly M., Lombroso R., Camus E., Bisson J.P.: Facteurs pronostiques spermatiques des inseminations intra-utérines avec sperme du conjoint. Contracept. Fertil. Sex. 1996, 24: 897–903.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. World Health Organisation, WHO: Manual for Examination of Human Semen and Sperm-Cervical Mucus Interaction. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1992 pp 13–17.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Yanagimachi R.: The movement of golden hamster sperm before and after capacitation. J. Reprod. Fertil., 1970, 23: 193–196.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Yovich J.L., Matson P.L.: The treatment of infertility by the high intrauterine insemination of husband’s washed spermatozoa. Hum. Reprod, 1988, 3: 939–943.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Zhu J.J., Pacey A.A., Baratt C.L.R., Cooke I.D.: Computer-assisted measurements of hyperactivation in human spermatozoa: differences between European and American version of the Hamilton-Thorn motility analyser. Hum. Reprod., 1994, 9: 456–462.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pilikian, S. Numération, mobilité, térastospermie et résultats en AMP. Androl. 7, 466–476 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03035273

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03035273

Mots-clés

Key words