ArticleAndrology2025
Reproductive functions and fertility preservation in men with sickle cell disease.
Article in Andrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sickle Cell Disease and Male Infertility: Pathophysiological Mechanisms, Clinical Manifestations, and Fertility Preservation Strategies-A Narrative Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSickle cell disease (SCD) is a prevalent hereditary disorder with significant morbidity, including potential impacts on male fertility. This study aims to evaluate the semen parameters in men with SCD and assess the outcomes of fertility preservation strategies.
methodsThis retrospective study included 121 men with SCD referred to the fertility Centre at Tenon University Hospital, Paris, between 2012 and 2023. Patients were categorized into three groups based on hydroxyurea (HU) exposure: without HU (WHU), ongoing HU(OHU), and previous HU (PHU). Clinical and semen parameters data were collected and compared with those of 107 healthy sperm donors. Semen parameters were analyzed according to World Health Organization guidelines, and sperm freezing protocols were standardized. Statistical analysis was performed to compare semen parameters between groups.
resultsOf the 121 patients, 117 successfully collected semen. All semen parameters, including volume, concentration, total count, motility, vitality, and morphology, were significantly reduced in SCD patients without HU exposure compared to donors. Nine had azoospermia and 45 had oligozoospermia, compared to 11 sperm donors with oligozoospermia (p < 0.05). The impact of HU on semen parameters could not be demonstrated due to the small-sample size. Fertility preservation outcomes showed a mean of 1.96 collections per patient, yielding a mean of 8.7 straws, with a majority requiring in vitro fertilization with intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) for future use. Seven patients used their cryopreserved sperm, resulting in two successful births.
conclusionsThis study, the largest of its kind, confirms significant alterations in semen parameters in men with SCD. Due to deleterious effects of treatments on male reproductive functions, fertility preservation remains crucial for these patients. Further research is needed to refine fertility preservation strategies and address the long-term reproductive health of men with SCD.
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.