ArticleReproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)2022
Does Microfluidic Sperm Sorting Affect Embryo Euploidy Rates in Couples with High Sperm DNA Fragmentation?
Article in Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The impact of mitochondrial impairments on sperm function and male fertility: a systematic review.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative Efficacy of Microfluidics and Density Gradient Centrifugation for Sperm Preparation in IVF: A Randomized Controlled Trial.JBRA assisted reproduction · 2026Trial
- Nomogram model to predict the probability of spontaneous abortion in human assisted reproductive technology.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Does Microfluidic Sperm Sorting Affect Embryo Ploidy in Human In Vitro Fertilization?Bulletin of experimental biology and medicine · 2026Article
- Sperm Selection Procedures in Cases of High Sperm DNA Fragmentation Index.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026Review
- Article
- Review
- A Narrative Review on the Sperm Selection Methods in Assisted Reproductive Technology: Out with the New, the Old Is Better?Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Improving sperm selection strategies for assisted reproduction through closing the knowledge gap in sperm maturation mechanics.Human reproduction open · 2025Review
- Advanced Sperm Selection Techniques for Assisted Reproduction.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Sperm Preparation with Microfluidic Sperm Sorting Chip May Improve Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Outcomes Compared to Density Gradient Centrifugation.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2024Article
- Recurrent miscarriage and male factor infertility: diagnostic and therapeutic implications. A narrative review.Central European journal of urology · 2023Review
- Embryologic outcomes among patients using a microfluidics chip compared to density gradient centrifugation to process sperm: a paired analysis.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Male infertility contributes as the main factor in 30-50% of infertility cases. Conventional methods for sperm preparation have induced questioning of sperm recovery rates. The microfluidic sperm sorting (MSS) technique selects highly motile sperm with lower levels of SDF (sperm DNA fragmentation) compared to conventional sperm sorting techniques. This study aimed to determine whether utilizing this technique will reveal better embryo quality and euploidy rates in couples with repeated implantation failure (RIF) and high SDF in a new PGT-A (preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies) cycle. This retrospective study included couples referred to PGT-A for previous repeated ART (assisted reproductive techniques) cycle failures and with high SDF. In their new cycles, couples who accepted the technique were assigned to the MSS group, and the rest were managed with DGC (density-gradient centrifugation). Two groups were compared in terms of fertilization and euploidy rates, clinical miscarriage and live birth rates, the total number of blastocysts, and top quality blastocysts. There was no difference between the groups regarding fertilization rates, euploidy rates, clinical miscarriage, and live birth rates. The total number of blastocysts and top quality blastocysts were significantly higher in the MSS group. The MSS technique provides a higher number of top-quality blastocysts than DGC; however, neither euploidy nor live birth rates improved. Studies focusing on confounding factors to embryonic genomic status in the presence of high SDF are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34731459What 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.