Controversy and consensus on the management of elevated sperm DNA fragmentation in male infertility: a global survey, current guidelines, and expert recommendations

PURPOSE: Sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) has been associated with male infertility and poor outcomes of assisted reproductive technology (ART). The purpose of this study was to investigate global practices related to the management of elevated SDF in infertile men, summarize the relevant professional society recommendations, and provide expert recommendations for managing this condition. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online global survey on clinical practices related to SDF was disseminated to reproductive clinicians, according to the CHERRIES checklist criteria. Management protocols for various conditions associated with SDF were captured and compared to the relevant recommendations in professional society guidelines and the appropriate available evidence. Expert recommendations and consensus on the management of infertile men with elevated SDF were then formulated and adapted using the Delphi method. RESULTS: A total of 436 experts from 55 different countries submitted responses. As an initial approach, 79.1% of reproductive experts recommend lifestyle modifications for infertile men with elevated SDF, and 76.9% prescribe empiric antioxidants. Regarding antioxidant duration, 39.3% recommend 4-6 months and 38.1% recommend 3 months. For men with unexplained or idiopathic infertility, and couples experiencing recurrent miscarriages associated with elevated SDF, most respondents refer to ART 6 months after failure of conservative and empiric medical management. Infertile men with clinical varicocele, normal conventional semen parameters, and elevated SDF are offered varicocele repair immediately after diagnosis by 31.4%, and after failure of antioxidants and conservative measures by 40.9%. Sperm selection techniques and testicular sperm extraction are also management options for couples undergoing ART. For most questions, heterogenous practices were demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: This paper presents the results of a large global survey on the management of infertile men with elevated SDF and reveals a lack of consensus among clinicians. Furthermore, it demonstrates the scarcity of professional society guidelines in this regard and attempts to highlight the relevant evidence. Expert recommendations are proposed to help guide clinicians

Does varicocele repair improve conventional semen parameters? A meta-analytic study of before-after data

Purpose The purpose of this meta-analysis is to study the impact of varicocele repair in the largest cohort of infertile males with clinical varicocele by including all available studies, with no language restrictions, comparing intra-person conventional semen parameters before and after the repair of varicoceles. Materials and Methods The meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA-P and MOOSE guidelines. A systematic search was performed in Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases. Eligible studies were selected according to the PICOS model (Population: infertile male patients with clinical varicocele; Intervention: varicocele repair; Comparison: intra-person before-after varicocele repair; Outcome: conventional semen parameters; Study type: randomized controlled trials [RCTs], observational and case-control studies). Results Out of 1,632 screened abstracts, 351 articles (23 RCTs, 292 observational, and 36 case-control studies) were included in the quantitative analysis. The before-and-after analysis showed significant improvements in all semen parameters after varicocele repair (except sperm vitality); semen volume: standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.203, 95% CI: 0.129–0.278; p<0.001; I2=83.62%, Egger’s p=0.3329; sperm concentration: SMD 1.590, 95% CI: 1.474–1.706; p<0.001; I2=97.86%, Egger’s p<0.0001; total sperm count: SMD 1.824, 95% CI: 1.526–2.121; p<0.001; I2=97.88%, Egger’s p=0.0063; total motile sperm count: SMD 1.643, 95% CI: 1.318–1.968; p<0.001; I2=98.65%, Egger’s p=0.0003; progressive sperm motility: SMD 1.845, 95% CI: 1.537%–2.153%; p<0.001; I2=98.97%, Egger’s p<0.0001; total sperm motility: SMD 1.613, 95% CI 1.467%–1.759%; p<0.001; l2=97.98%, Egger’s p<0.001; sperm morphology: SMD 1.066, 95% CI 0.992%–1.211%; p<0.001; I2=97.87%, Egger’s p=0.1864. Conclusions The current meta-analysis is the largest to date using paired analysis on varicocele patients. In the current meta-analysis, almost all conventional semen parameters improved significantly following varicocele repair in infertile patients with clinical varicocele. Keywords Controlled before-after studies; Infertility, male; Meta-analysis; Varicocel

Molecular investigation of menstrual tissue for the presence of Chlamydia trachomatis, Ureaplasma urealyticum and Mycoplasma hominis collected by women with a history of infertility

Aim: At present, routine laboratory investigation of the infectious agents implicated in female genital infections is mainly based on culture/direct fluorescence antibody (DFA) (immunofluorescence antibody test) results of cervicovaginal secretions. In this study the use of the menstrual tissue is introduced for the molecular detection of pathogens which are implicated in female infertility. Material and Methods: Cervicovaginal secretions and menstrual tissue samples of 87 women (mean age 34.07 ± 5.17) experiencing infertility problems were screened for Chlamydia trachomatis, Ureaplasma urealyticum and Mycoplasma hominis presence using polymerase chain reaction (PCR, light cycler-PCR). Cervicovaginal secretions were also tested by the culture/DFA technique. The results were compared using the binomial test. Results: In the overall study group, the prevalence of C. trachomatis was 25.3%, 18.3%, and 13.8%, the prevalence of U. urealyticum was 18.3%, 16.09% and 12.6% and the prevalence of M. hominis was 13.7%, 19.5% and 8.0% in the menstrual tissue, cervicovaginal secretions using PCR and cervicovaginal secretions culture/DFA, respectively. A statistically significant difference was revealed between the two methods for all three microbes and between menstrual tissue and cervicovaginal secretions PCR for chlamydia. Conclusions: The use of menstrual tissue along with the PCR method seems to be an effective and thus novel alternative for the investigation of the infectious agents lying in the genital tract. One of the main advantages of this technique compared to cervicovaginal secretions is that it is non-invasive and the sample can be collected at home, thus allowing the early detection and treatment of a condition that can otherwise lead to serious consequences, such as tubal obstruction, pelvic inflammatory disease, ectopic pregnancy, spontaneous abortions and unexplained infertility. © 2013 Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Herpes virus infected spermatozoa following density gradient centrifugation for IVF purposes

Studies have documented the presence of herpes viruses in semen. The aim of our study was to determine whether they persist in semen samples following two-density gradient centrifugation for IVF purposes. Semen samples were collected from 109 men seeking fertility evaluation, prior to IVF treatment. Routine semen analysis was performed according to WHO guidelines. Each sample was treated in a two-density gradient centrifugation using PureSperm (PS). Both untreated and treated samples were screened for the presence of herpes viruses, using PCR. Kruskal-Wallis, chi-square and binomial statistical tests were used; P≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. No statistically significant associations were observed between semen parameters and viral presence. Viral DNA was detected in 54% of semen samples: HSV1/2 in 32 samples, EBV in 49, CMV in 47, HHV6 in 9, HHV7 in 4 and VZV in none. PS gradient failed to remove CMV in 89.36%, HSV1/2 in 59.38% and EBV in 22.45% of samples, while HHV6 and 7 were completely removed. Especially HSV1/2 and CMV seem to persist even following PS treatment. These observations indicate the possible risk of oocyte becoming infected during insemination, by IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection, with unknown sequelae. Further studies are required to determine whether any correlation exists between their presence, implantation rate and the outcome of pregnancy. © 2011 Blackwell Verlag GmbH

Improvement of Sperm Quality in Hyperviscous Semen following DNase i Treatment

Semen hyperviscosity impairs sperm motility and can lead to male infertility. This prospective study aimed at assessing the ability of exogenous DNase in improving sperm quality, taking into consideration that DNase has been found in the seminal plasma of several species and that neutrophils release chromatin in order to trap bacteria. A total of seventy-seven semen samples with high seminal viscosity (HSV) as the study group and sixty-two semen samples with normal seminal viscosity (NSV) as the control group were compared in this analysis. These semen samples were divided into three groups of receiving treatment (a) with DNase I at 37°C for 15 min, (b) by density gradient centrifugation, and (c) with a combination of the above two methods. Following a fifteen-minute treatment of hyperviscous semen, the motility of spermatozoa in 83% of semen samples increased to a statistically significant degree. On the contrary, DNase treatment of semen with normal viscosity had no such effects. The above treatment was also accompanied by a significant increase in the percentage of normal spermatozoa, resulting in a major decrease of the teratozoospermia index. Comparison between semen samples that underwent density gradient centrifugation following DNase I treatment, to those collected after density gradient treatment alone, showed that in the first case the results were more spectacular. The evaluation of each preparation in terms of yield (% total progressively motile sperm count after treatment in relation to the initial total sperm count) revealed that the combined approach resulted in 29.8% vs. 18.5% with density treatment alone (p=0.0121). DNase I treatment results in an improvement of sperm motility and morphology and could be beneficial to men with hyperviscous semen in assisted reproduction protocols. © 2019 Effrosyni Nosi et al

Does Varicocele Repair Improve Conventional Semen Parameters? A Meta-Analytic Study of Before-After Data

Purpose: The purpose of this meta-analysis is to study the impact of varicocele repair in the largest cohort of infertile males with clinical varicocele by including all available studies, with no language restrictions, comparing intra-person conventional semen parameters before and after the repair of varicoceles. Materials and methods: The meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA-P and MOOSE guidelines. A systematic search was performed in Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases. Eligible studies were selected according to the PICOS model (Population: infertile male patients with clinical varicocele; Intervention: varicocele repair; Comparison: intra-person before-after varicocele repair; Outcome: conventional semen parameters; Study type: randomized controlled trials [RCTs], observational and case-control studies). Results: Out of 1,632 screened abstracts, 351 articles (23 RCTs, 292 observational, and 36 case-control studies) were included in the quantitative analysis. The before-and-after analysis showed significant improvements in all semen parameters after varicocele repair (except sperm vitality); semen volume: standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.203, 95% CI: 0.129-0.278; p&lt;0.001; I²=83.62%, Egger's p=0.3329; sperm concentration: SMD 1.590, 95% CI: 1.474-1.706; p&lt;0.001; I²=97.86%, Egger's p&lt;0.0001; total sperm count: SMD 1.824, 95% CI: 1.526-2.121; p&lt;0.001; I²=97.88%, Egger's p=0.0063; total motile sperm count: SMD 1.643, 95% CI: 1.318-1.968; p&lt;0.001; I²=98.65%, Egger's p=0.0003; progressive sperm motility: SMD 1.845, 95% CI: 1.537%-2.153%; p&lt;0.001; I²=98.97%, Egger's p&lt;0.0001; total sperm motility: SMD 1.613, 95% CI 1.467%-1.759%; p&lt;0.001; l2=97.98%, Egger's p&lt;0.001; sperm morphology: SMD 1.066, 95% CI 0.992%-1.211%; p&lt;0.001; I²=97.87%, Egger's p=0.1864. Conclusions: The current meta-analysis is the largest to date using paired analysis on varicocele patients. In the current meta-analysis, almost all conventional semen parameters improved significantly following varicocele repair in infertile patients with clinical varicocele

Controversy and Consensus on the Management of Elevated Sperm DNA Fragmentation in Male Infertility: A Global Survey, Current Guidelines, and Expert Recommendations

Purpose: Sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) has been associated with male infertility and poor outcomes of assisted reproductive technology (ART). The purpose of this study was to investigate global practices related to the management of elevated SDF in infertile men, summarize the relevant professional society recommendations, and provide expert recommendations for managing this condition. Materials and methods: An online global survey on clinical practices related to SDF was disseminated to reproductive clinicians, according to the CHERRIES checklist criteria. Management protocols for various conditions associated with SDF were captured and compared to the relevant recommendations in professional society guidelines and the appropriate available evidence. Expert recommendations and consensus on the management of infertile men with elevated SDF were then formulated and adapted using the Delphi method. Results: A total of 436 experts from 55 different countries submitted responses. As an initial approach, 79.1% of reproductive experts recommend lifestyle modifications for infertile men with elevated SDF, and 76.9% prescribe empiric antioxidants. Regarding antioxidant duration, 39.3% recommend 4-6 months and 38.1% recommend 3 months. For men with unexplained or idiopathic infertility, and couples experiencing recurrent miscarriages associated with elevated SDF, most respondents refer to ART 6 months after failure of conservative and empiric medical management. Infertile men with clinical varicocele, normal conventional semen parameters, and elevated SDF are offered varicocele repair immediately after diagnosis by 31.4%, and after failure of antioxidants and conservative measures by 40.9%. Sperm selection techniques and testicular sperm extraction are also management options for couples undergoing ART. For most questions, heterogenous practices were demonstrated. Conclusions: This paper presents the results of a large global survey on the management of infertile men with elevated SDF and reveals a lack of consensus among clinicians. Furthermore, it demonstrates the scarcity of professional society guidelines in this regard and attempts to highlight the relevant evidence. Expert recommendations are proposed to help guide clinicians

Consensus and Diversity in the Management of Varicocele for Male Infertility: Results of a Global Practice Survey and Comparison with Guidelines and Recommendations

Purpose: Varicocele is a common problem among infertile men. Varicocele repair (VR) is frequently performed to improve semen parameters and the chances of pregnancy. However, there is a lack of consensus about the diagnosis, indications for VR and its outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore global practice patterns on the management of varicocele in the context of male infertility. Materials and Methods: Sixty practicing urologists/andrologists from 23 countries contributed 382 multiple-choice-questions pertaining to varicocele management. These were condensed into an online questionnaire that was forwarded to clinicians involved in male infertility management through direct invitation. The results were analyzed for disagreement and agreement in practice patterns and, compared with the latest guidelines of international professional societies (American Urological As-sociation [AUA], American Society for Reproductive Medicine [ASRM], and European Association of Urology [EAU]), and with evidence emerging from recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Additionally, an expert opinion on each topic was provided based on the consensus of 16 experts in the field. Results: The questionnaire was answered by 574 clinicians from 59 countries. The majority of respondents were urologists/ uro-andrologists. A wide diversity of opinion was seen in every aspect of varicocele diagnosis, indications for repair, choice of technique, management of sub-clinical varicocele and the role of VR in azoospermia. A significant proportion of the re-sponses were at odds with the recommendations of AUA, ASRM, and EAU. A large number of clinical situations were identi-fied where no guidelines are available. Conclusions: This study is the largest global survey performed to date on the clinical management of varicocele for male in-fertility. It demonstrates: 1) a wide disagreement in the approach to varicocele management, 2) large gaps in the clinical prac-tice guidelines from professional societies, and 3) the need for further studies on several aspects of varicocele management in infertile men

Consensus and Diversity in the Management of Varicocele for Male Infertility: Results of a Global Practice Survey and Comparison with Guidelines and Recommendations

Purpose: Varicocele is a common problem among infertile men. Varicocele repair (VR) is frequently performed to improve semen parameters and the chances of pregnancy. However, there is a lack of consensus about the diagnosis, indications for VR and its outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore global practice patterns on the management of varicocele in the context of male infertility. Materials and methods: Sixty practicing urologists/andrologists from 23 countries contributed 382 multiple-choice-questions pertaining to varicocele management. These were condensed into an online questionnaire that was forwarded to clinicians involved in male infertility management through direct invitation. The results were analyzed for disagreement and agreement in practice patterns and, compared with the latest guidelines of international professional societies (American Urological Association [AUA], American Society for Reproductive Medicine [ASRM], and European Association of Urology [EAU]), and with evidence emerging from recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Additionally, an expert opinion on each topic was provided based on the consensus of 16 experts in the field. Results: The questionnaire was answered by 574 clinicians from 59 countries. The majority of respondents were urologists/uro-andrologists. A wide diversity of opinion was seen in every aspect of varicocele diagnosis, indications for repair, choice of technique, management of sub-clinical varicocele and the role of VR in azoospermia. A significant proportion of the responses were at odds with the recommendations of AUA, ASRM, and EAU. A large number of clinical situations were identified where no guidelines are available. Conclusions: This study is the largest global survey performed to date on the clinical management of varicocele for male infertility. It demonstrates: 1) a wide disagreement in the approach to varicocele management, 2) large gaps in the clinical practice guidelines from professional societies, and 3) the need for further studies on several aspects of varicocele management in infertile men