Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31890218›Full record

ArticleBasic and clinical andrology2019

Can the SCD test and terminal uridine nick-end labeling by flow cytometry technique (TUNEL/FCM) be used interchangeably to measure sperm DNA damage in routine laboratory practice?

Cécile Grèze, Aline Guttmann, Hanae Pons-Rejraji, Marie-Paule Vasson, Jacqueline Lornage, Lemlih Ouchchane, Florence Brugnon

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Basic and clinical andrology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Effect of zinc on sperm recovered by swim-up.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Current markers for infertility in men.JBRA assisted reproduction · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Cécile Grèze1Assistance Médicale à la Procréation, CECOS, Pôle Femme et Enfant, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand, France.ORCID 0000-0003-1089-985X
Aline Guttmann3Biostatistics Unit, Department of Public Health, Clermont-Ferrand University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Hanae Pons-Rejraji1Assistance Médicale à la Procréation, CECOS, Pôle Femme et Enfant, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Marie-Paule Vasson6Unité de Nutrition Humaine, UMR 1019 - INRA/UCA, Equipe ECREIN, Université Clermont Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Jacqueline Lornage8Service de Médecine de la Reproduction, Hôpital Femme-Mère-Enfant, CHU de Lyon, Bron, France.
Lemlih Ouchchane3Biostatistics Unit, Department of Public Health, Clermont-Ferrand University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Florence Brugnon1Assistance Médicale à la Procréation, CECOS, Pôle Femme et Enfant, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRHôpital Femme Mère Enfant · FRInserm · FRUnité de Nutrition Humaine · FRUniversité Clermont Auvergne · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNumerous tests have been proposed to evaluate sperm DNA integrity. To assess the sperm chromatin dispersion (SCD) test in an andrology laboratory, twenty-five men attending Clermont-Ferrand (France) University Hospital's Center for Reproductive Medicine were recruited. Sperm DNA damage was measured in the same semen samples using the SCD test and the Terminal Uridine Nick-end Labeling by flow cytometry technique (TUNEL/FCM) after density gradient centrifugation.

resultsSCD test reliability between readings, readers or slides was clearly established with very high agreement between measurements (Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) at 0.97, 0.95 and 0.98 respectively). Despite very good agreement between the SCD test and TUNEL/FCM (ICC at 0.94), the SCD test tended to slightly but significantly underestimate DNA damage compared with TUNEL (

conclusionsAndrology laboratories using the SCD test to measure sperm DNA damage need to know that it appears to give slightly underestimated measurements compared to TUNEL/FCM. However, this systematic underestimation is very small in amplitude. Both techniques give almost perfectly congruent results. Our study underlines the importance for each laboratory to validate its method to assess sperm DNA damage before implementing it in routine andrology lab practice.

Indexed as

Andrology laboratoryDNA damageFlow cytometrySpermatozoaSperm chromatin dispersion testTUNEL

Identifiers

PMID31890218
PMCPMC6933933
OpenAlexW2997988482

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.