ArticleAmerican journal of men's health
Efficacy of Various Sperm Selection Strategies in Obtaining Sperm with Improved DNA Integrity: A Prospective Study.
Article in American journal of men's health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Increased sperm DNA fragmentation index (DFI) despite normal semen analysis may be encountered in couples with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss. Therefore, implementing strategies for selecting sperm cells with appropriate DNA integrity may improve the outcomes of assisted reproductive technology (ART). This study compared the efficacy of short abstinence, magnetic activated cell sorting (MACS), and zeta potential in obtaining sperm cells of improved quality. Accordingly, among couples with recurrent ART failures or recurrent abortions, 30 men with increased sperm DFI (sperm chromatin dispersion [SCD] more than 18 %) were enrolled. Subsequently, each participant provided a semen specimen after abstaining for 2 to 3 days. This specimen was divided into three parts. Sample 1 underwent semen analysis and DNA integrity/protamination evaluation using SCD/chromomycin A3 (CMA3) indices. Samples 2 and 3 underwent similar assessments after processing with zeta potential and the MACS techniques, respectively. Finally, Sample 4 was provided the following day after a short abstinence of 24 hr, and was analyzed as the previous samples. Based on the results, Sample 1 had the highest sperm count, and MACS preserved more sperm compared with zeta potential. By applying the three mentioned strategies, the percentage of sperm cells with progressive movement increased significantly, with MACS being more effective compared with the zeta potential (
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.