Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41382175›Full record

ReviewActa veterinaria Scandinavica2025

A review of sperm cryopreservation in the domestic dog and cat-part II, freezing epididymal spermatozoa, why is it different from ejaculated spermatozoa?

Eva Axnér

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Acta veterinaria Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

1 author.

Eva AxnérDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 7054, Uppsala, 750 07, Sweden. eva.axner@slu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9233-7038

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

If a male dies suddenly or requires castration, it may still be possible to produce offspring through artificial insemination (AI) by cryopreserving spermatozoa retrieved from the epididymis. Spermatozoa differ in maturation status along the epididymal duct, and only motile spermatozoa that have acquired fertilizing capacity are suitable for AI. Such spermatozoa can be collected from the terminal epididymal segment, located in the cauda epididymidis in the dog, and in both the corpus and cauda in the cat. Unlike ejaculated spermatozoa, epididymal spermatozoa have not been exposed to seminal plasma and therefore display distinct functional and structural characteristics. The method of sperm collection may also affect the sperm quality. While epididymal mincing results in the highest sperm numbers, it is associated with contamination of blood and epididymal tissue. Although numerous studies have reported successful cryopreservation of epididymal spermatozoa in dogs and cats, reports of live offspring following AI with frozen-thawed epididymal spermatozoa remain scarce. This review summarizes the physiological, anatomical, and functional distinctions between epididymal and ejaculated spermatozoa, emphasizing their implications for cryopreservation strategies and fertility outcomes.

Indexed as

CryopreservationEpididymisSemen PreservationSpermatozoaAnimalsCatsDogsEjaculationInsemination, ArtificialMaleArtificial inseminationCanineComparative reproductionCryobiologyCryopreservationFelineReproductionSperm

Identifiers

PMID41382175
PMCPMC12699902

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.