Cargando…

The impact of cryopreserved sperm on intrauterine insemination outcomes: is frozen as good as fresh?

INTRODUCTION: Frozen sperm utilization might negatively impact cycle outcomes in animals, implicating cryopreservation-induced sperm damage. However, in vitro fertilization and intrauterine insemination (IUI) in human studies are inconclusive. METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of 5,335 I...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cherouveim, Panagiotis, Vagios, Stylianos, Hammer, Karissa, Fitz, Victoria, Jiang, Victoria S., Dimitriadis, Irene, Sacha, Caitlin R., James, Kaitlyn E., Bormann, Charles L., Souter, Irene
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10264626/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37325242
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/frph.2023.1181751
_version_ 1785058363504066560
author Cherouveim, Panagiotis
Vagios, Stylianos
Hammer, Karissa
Fitz, Victoria
Jiang, Victoria S.
Dimitriadis, Irene
Sacha, Caitlin R.
James, Kaitlyn E.
Bormann, Charles L.
Souter, Irene
author_facet Cherouveim, Panagiotis
Vagios, Stylianos
Hammer, Karissa
Fitz, Victoria
Jiang, Victoria S.
Dimitriadis, Irene
Sacha, Caitlin R.
James, Kaitlyn E.
Bormann, Charles L.
Souter, Irene
author_sort Cherouveim, Panagiotis
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Frozen sperm utilization might negatively impact cycle outcomes in animals, implicating cryopreservation-induced sperm damage. However, in vitro fertilization and intrauterine insemination (IUI) in human studies are inconclusive. METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of 5,335 IUI [± ovarian stimulation (OS)] cycles from a large academic fertility center. Cycles were stratified based on the utilization of frozen (FROZEN, n = 1,871) instead of fresh ejaculated sperm (FRESH, n = 3,464). Main outcomes included human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) positivity, clinical pregnancy (CP), and spontaneous abortion (SAB) rates. Secondary outcome was live birth (LB) rate. Odds ratios (OR) for all outcomes were calculated utilizing logistic regression and adjusted (adjOR) for maternal age, day-3 FSH, and OS regimen. Stratified analysis was performed based on OS subtype [gonadotropins; oral medications (OM): clomiphene citrate and letrozole; and unstimulated/natural]. Time to pregnancy and cumulative pregnancy rates were also calculated. Further subanalyses were performed limited to either the first cycle only or to the partner's sperm only, after excluding female factor infertility, and after stratification by female age (<30, 30–35, and >35 years old). RESULTS: Overall, HCG positivity and CP were lower in the FROZEN compared to the FRESH group (12.2% vs. 15.6%, p < 0.001; 9.4% vs. 13.0%, p < 0.001, respectively), which persisted only among OM cycles after stratification (9.9% vs. 14.2% HCG positivity, p = 0.030; 8.1% vs. 11.8% CP, p = 0.041). Among all cycles, adjOR (95% CI) for HCG positivity and CP were 0.75 (0.56–1.02) and 0.77 (0.57–1.03), respectively, ref: FRESH. In OM cycles, adjOR (95% CI) for HCG positivity [0.55 (0.30–0.99)] and CP [0.49 (0.25–0.95), ref.: FRESH] favored the FRESH group but showed no differences among gonadotropin and natural cycles. SAB odds did not differ between groups among OM and natural cycles but were lower in the FROZEN group among gonadotropin cycles [adjOR (95% CI): 0.13 (0.02–0.98), ref.: FRESH]. There were no differences in CP and SAB in the performed subanalyses (limited to first cycles or partner's sperm only, after excluding female factors, or after stratification according to female age). Nevertheless, time to conception was slightly longer in the FROZEN compared to the FRESH group (3.84 vs. 2.58 cycles, p < 0.001). No significant differences were present in LB and cumulative pregnancy results, other than in the subgroup of natural cycles, where higher LB odds [adjOR (95% CI): 1.08 (1.05–1.12)] and higher cumulative pregnancy rate (34% vs. 15%, p = 0.002) were noted in the FROZEN compared to the FRESH group. CONCLUSION: Overall, clinical outcomes did not differ significantly between frozen and fresh sperm IUI cycles, although specific subgroups might benefit from fresh sperm utilization.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10264626
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102646262023-06-15 The impact of cryopreserved sperm on intrauterine insemination outcomes: is frozen as good as fresh? Cherouveim, Panagiotis Vagios, Stylianos Hammer, Karissa Fitz, Victoria Jiang, Victoria S. Dimitriadis, Irene Sacha, Caitlin R. James, Kaitlyn E. Bormann, Charles L. Souter, Irene Front Reprod Health Reproductive Health INTRODUCTION: Frozen sperm utilization might negatively impact cycle outcomes in animals, implicating cryopreservation-induced sperm damage. However, in vitro fertilization and intrauterine insemination (IUI) in human studies are inconclusive. METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of 5,335 IUI [± ovarian stimulation (OS)] cycles from a large academic fertility center. Cycles were stratified based on the utilization of frozen (FROZEN, n = 1,871) instead of fresh ejaculated sperm (FRESH, n = 3,464). Main outcomes included human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) positivity, clinical pregnancy (CP), and spontaneous abortion (SAB) rates. Secondary outcome was live birth (LB) rate. Odds ratios (OR) for all outcomes were calculated utilizing logistic regression and adjusted (adjOR) for maternal age, day-3 FSH, and OS regimen. Stratified analysis was performed based on OS subtype [gonadotropins; oral medications (OM): clomiphene citrate and letrozole; and unstimulated/natural]. Time to pregnancy and cumulative pregnancy rates were also calculated. Further subanalyses were performed limited to either the first cycle only or to the partner's sperm only, after excluding female factor infertility, and after stratification by female age (<30, 30–35, and >35 years old). RESULTS: Overall, HCG positivity and CP were lower in the FROZEN compared to the FRESH group (12.2% vs. 15.6%, p < 0.001; 9.4% vs. 13.0%, p < 0.001, respectively), which persisted only among OM cycles after stratification (9.9% vs. 14.2% HCG positivity, p = 0.030; 8.1% vs. 11.8% CP, p = 0.041). Among all cycles, adjOR (95% CI) for HCG positivity and CP were 0.75 (0.56–1.02) and 0.77 (0.57–1.03), respectively, ref: FRESH. In OM cycles, adjOR (95% CI) for HCG positivity [0.55 (0.30–0.99)] and CP [0.49 (0.25–0.95), ref.: FRESH] favored the FRESH group but showed no differences among gonadotropin and natural cycles. SAB odds did not differ between groups among OM and natural cycles but were lower in the FROZEN group among gonadotropin cycles [adjOR (95% CI): 0.13 (0.02–0.98), ref.: FRESH]. There were no differences in CP and SAB in the performed subanalyses (limited to first cycles or partner's sperm only, after excluding female factors, or after stratification according to female age). Nevertheless, time to conception was slightly longer in the FROZEN compared to the FRESH group (3.84 vs. 2.58 cycles, p < 0.001). No significant differences were present in LB and cumulative pregnancy results, other than in the subgroup of natural cycles, where higher LB odds [adjOR (95% CI): 1.08 (1.05–1.12)] and higher cumulative pregnancy rate (34% vs. 15%, p = 0.002) were noted in the FROZEN compared to the FRESH group. CONCLUSION: Overall, clinical outcomes did not differ significantly between frozen and fresh sperm IUI cycles, although specific subgroups might benefit from fresh sperm utilization. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-05-31 /pmc/articles/PMC10264626/ /pubmed/37325242 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/frph.2023.1181751 Text en © 2023 Cherouveim, Vagios, Hammer, Fitz, Jiang, Dimitriadis, Sacha, James, Bormann and Souter. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Reproductive Health
Cherouveim, Panagiotis
Vagios, Stylianos
Hammer, Karissa
Fitz, Victoria
Jiang, Victoria S.
Dimitriadis, Irene
Sacha, Caitlin R.
James, Kaitlyn E.
Bormann, Charles L.
Souter, Irene
The impact of cryopreserved sperm on intrauterine insemination outcomes: is frozen as good as fresh?
title The impact of cryopreserved sperm on intrauterine insemination outcomes: is frozen as good as fresh?
title_full The impact of cryopreserved sperm on intrauterine insemination outcomes: is frozen as good as fresh?
title_fullStr The impact of cryopreserved sperm on intrauterine insemination outcomes: is frozen as good as fresh?
title_full_unstemmed The impact of cryopreserved sperm on intrauterine insemination outcomes: is frozen as good as fresh?
title_short The impact of cryopreserved sperm on intrauterine insemination outcomes: is frozen as good as fresh?
title_sort impact of cryopreserved sperm on intrauterine insemination outcomes: is frozen as good as fresh?
topic Reproductive Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10264626/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37325242
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/frph.2023.1181751
work_keys_str_mv AT cherouveimpanagiotis theimpactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT vagiosstylianos theimpactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT hammerkarissa theimpactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT fitzvictoria theimpactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT jiangvictorias theimpactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT dimitriadisirene theimpactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT sachacaitlinr theimpactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT jameskaitlyne theimpactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT bormanncharlesl theimpactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT souterirene theimpactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT cherouveimpanagiotis impactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT vagiosstylianos impactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT hammerkarissa impactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT fitzvictoria impactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT jiangvictorias impactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT dimitriadisirene impactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT sachacaitlinr impactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT jameskaitlyne impactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT bormanncharlesl impactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh
AT souterirene impactofcryopreservedspermonintrauterineinseminationoutcomesisfrozenasgoodasfresh