Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34905541›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 in semen, seminal plasma, and spermatozoa pellet of COVID-19 patients in the acute stage of infection.

Lucie Delaroche, Mélanie Bertine, Pierre Oger, Diane Descamps, Florence Damond, Emmanuel Genauzeau, Philippe Meicler, Quentin Le Hingrat, Frédéric Lamazou, Rémi Gschwind and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. SARS-CoV-2, fertility and assisted reproduction.Human reproduction update · 2023
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. SARS-CoV-2 can infect human embryos.Scientific reports · 2022
    Article
  20. 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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lucie DelarocheRamsay Santé, Hôpital Privé de Parly 2, Institut Fertilité Maternité Parly 2, Le Chesnay, France.ORCID 0000-0002-4768-3051
Mélanie BertineUniversité de Paris, INSERM, IAME, Paris, France.
Pierre OgerRamsay Santé, Hôpital Privé de Parly 2, Institut Fertilité Maternité Parly 2, Le Chesnay, France.
Diane DescampsUniversité de Paris, INSERM, IAME, Paris, France.
Florence DamondUniversité de Paris, INSERM, IAME, Paris, France.
Emmanuel GenauzeauRamsay Santé, Hôpital Privé de Parly 2, Institut Fertilité Maternité Parly 2, Le Chesnay, France.
Philippe MeiclerRamsay Santé, Hôpital Privé de Parly 2, Institut Fertilité Maternité Parly 2, Le Chesnay, France.
Quentin Le HingratUniversité de Paris, INSERM, IAME, Paris, France.
Frédéric LamazouRamsay Santé, Hôpital Privé de Parly 2, Institut Fertilité Maternité Parly 2, Le Chesnay, France.
Rémi GschwindUniversité de Paris, INSERM, IAME, Paris, France.
Etienne RuppéUniversité de Paris, INSERM, IAME, Paris, France.
Benoit VisseauxUniversité de Paris, INSERM, IAME, Paris, France.
Inserm · FRGroupe de Recherche en Fertilité Humaine · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To date, there is limited information about the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in semen especially in the acute phase of the infection. While available data from cohort studies including a total of 342 patients in the acute or recovery phase of the infection are reassuring, one study mentioned detecting virus in the semen of 6/38 COVID-19 patients. Here we assessed SARS-CoV-2 presence in the semen of COVID-19 positive patients in the acute stage of infection, within 24 hours of the positive nasopharyngeal swabs. Semen, seminal plasma and spermatozoa pellet were screened for SARS-CoV-2 and manual or airborne contamination during semen sampling. Among the 32 COVID-19 volunteers, the median interval from the onset of symptoms to semen collection was 4 days [IQR: 0-8]. Only one presented positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR in semen and seminal plasma fractions, although the spermatozoa pellet was negative. Viral cultures were all negative. We observed slightly higher concentrations of bacterial DNA in the SARS-CoV-2 positive specimen than in all negative samples. The bacteria identified neither confirm nor rule out contamination by oropharyngeal secretions during collection. SARS-CoV-2 was rarely present in semen during the acute phase of the disease. This very rare situation could be connected to oral or manual contamination during semen collection. The possible presence of SARS-CoV-2 in semen calls for nasopharyngeal viral testing and strict hygiene protocols during semen collection before assisted reproductive attempts.

Indexed as

AdultCOVID-19HumansMaleMiddle AgedNasopharynxSARS-CoV-2SemenSpecimen HandlingSpermatozoa

Identifiers

PMID34905541
PMCPMC8670700
OpenAlexW4200369118

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.