ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2021
Efficacy and safety of papaverine as an in vitro motility enhancer on human spermatozoa.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of in vitro use of FSH on sperm parameters, DNA integrity, and mitochondrial membrane potential in asthenozoospermic men.International urology and nephrology · 2025Article
- Safety of Plasma Rich in Growth Factors (PRGF) as additive to healthy human sperm samples: a pilot study.JBRA assisted reproduction · 2024Article
- Applications of laser technology in the manipulation of human spermatozoa.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2023Review
- Sperm Selection for ICSI: Do We Have a Winner?Cells · 2021Review
- Design, Synthesis, Biological Evaluation and Silico Prediction of Novel Sinomenine Derivatives.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to examine the ability and safety of papaverine supplementation for in vitro sperm motility enhancement. In addition, sperm motility enhancement of papaverine was compared to pentoxifylline and theophylline. The post-thaw spermatozoa were used as an asthenozoospermia model.
methodsPost thaw sperm suspensions were divided into two groups: papaverine (100 μmol/L) and control, and each was investigated in two subgroups of 30- and 60-min exposure times. Detailed motility parameters were detected using a computerized sperm motility analyzer. Acrosomal status, viability, apoptosis, and DNA fragmentation were evaluated by flow cytometry. Furthermore, the motility-enhancing capacity of papaverine, pentoxifylline, and theophylline was compared.
resultsCryopreservation impaired sperm parameters dramatically but no significant changes occurred in acrosomal status and apoptosis. Supplementation of papaverine enhanced motility parameters consistently at all exposure intervals, significantly. However, viability was lower at the 60th minute compared to the 30th minute (p=0.019). Papaverine did not alter any acrosomal or apoptotic markers at any time points. All of the compounds compared in this study increased the motility parameters, where theophylline supplementation provided significantly better improvement in total motility compared to papaverine and pentoxifylline.
conclusionOur results suggest that in vitro papaverine treatment for 30 min adequately improves motility of post-thaw sperm, without leading to acrosome reaction, DNA damage, and viability loss. Theophylline's potency on increasing the ratio of total motile spermatozoa was found significantly superior than the two tested compounds. Prospective clinical studies with embryo production, pregnancy, and live birth data should be undertaken.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.