Cargando…

Does conventional freezing affect sperm DNA fragmentation?

OBJECTIVE: Sperm cryopreservation has been widely used in assisted reproductive technology, as it offers great potential for the treatment of some types of male infertility. However, cryopreservation may result in changes in membrane lipid composition and acrosome status, as well as reductions in sp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Le, Minh Tam, Nguyen, Thai Thanh Thi, Nguyen, Tung Thanh, Nguyen, Trung Van, Nguyen, Tam An Thi, Nguyen, Quoc Huy Vu, Cao, Thanh Ngoc
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Society for Reproductive Medicine 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6572667/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31181874
http://dx.doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2019.46.2.67
_version_ 1783427693941882880
author Le, Minh Tam
Nguyen, Thai Thanh Thi
Nguyen, Tung Thanh
Nguyen, Trung Van
Nguyen, Tam An Thi
Nguyen, Quoc Huy Vu
Cao, Thanh Ngoc
author_facet Le, Minh Tam
Nguyen, Thai Thanh Thi
Nguyen, Tung Thanh
Nguyen, Trung Van
Nguyen, Tam An Thi
Nguyen, Quoc Huy Vu
Cao, Thanh Ngoc
author_sort Le, Minh Tam
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Sperm cryopreservation has been widely used in assisted reproductive technology, as it offers great potential for the treatment of some types of male infertility. However, cryopreservation may result in changes in membrane lipid composition and acrosome status, as well as reductions in sperm motility and viability. This study aimed to evaluate sperm DNA fragmentation damage caused by conventional freezing using the sperm chromatin dispersion test. METHODS: In total, 120 fresh human semen samples were frozen by conventional methods, using SpermFreeze Solution as a cryoprotectant. Routine semen analysis and a Halosperm test (using the Halosperm kit) were performed on each sample before freezing and after thawing. Semen parameters and sperm DNA fragmentation were compared between these groups. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in sperm progressive motility, viability, and normal morphology after conventional freezing (32.78%, 79.58%, and 3.87% vs. 16%, 55.99%, and 2.55%, respectively). The sperm head, midpiece, and tail defect rate increased slightly after freezing. Furthermore, the DNA fragmentation index (DFI) was significantly higher after thawing than before freezing (19.21% prior to freezing vs. 22.23% after thawing). Significant increases in the DFI after cryopreservation were observed in samples with both normal and abnormal motility and morphology, as well as in those with normal viability. CONCLUSION: Conventional freezing seems to damage some sperm parameters, in particular causing a reduction in sperm DNA integrity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6572667
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Korean Society for Reproductive Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65726672019-06-20 Does conventional freezing affect sperm DNA fragmentation? Le, Minh Tam Nguyen, Thai Thanh Thi Nguyen, Tung Thanh Nguyen, Trung Van Nguyen, Tam An Thi Nguyen, Quoc Huy Vu Cao, Thanh Ngoc Clin Exp Reprod Med Original Article OBJECTIVE: Sperm cryopreservation has been widely used in assisted reproductive technology, as it offers great potential for the treatment of some types of male infertility. However, cryopreservation may result in changes in membrane lipid composition and acrosome status, as well as reductions in sperm motility and viability. This study aimed to evaluate sperm DNA fragmentation damage caused by conventional freezing using the sperm chromatin dispersion test. METHODS: In total, 120 fresh human semen samples were frozen by conventional methods, using SpermFreeze Solution as a cryoprotectant. Routine semen analysis and a Halosperm test (using the Halosperm kit) were performed on each sample before freezing and after thawing. Semen parameters and sperm DNA fragmentation were compared between these groups. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in sperm progressive motility, viability, and normal morphology after conventional freezing (32.78%, 79.58%, and 3.87% vs. 16%, 55.99%, and 2.55%, respectively). The sperm head, midpiece, and tail defect rate increased slightly after freezing. Furthermore, the DNA fragmentation index (DFI) was significantly higher after thawing than before freezing (19.21% prior to freezing vs. 22.23% after thawing). Significant increases in the DFI after cryopreservation were observed in samples with both normal and abnormal motility and morphology, as well as in those with normal viability. CONCLUSION: Conventional freezing seems to damage some sperm parameters, in particular causing a reduction in sperm DNA integrity. Korean Society for Reproductive Medicine 2019-06 2019-06-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6572667/ /pubmed/31181874 http://dx.doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2019.46.2.67 Text en Copyright © 2019. THE KOREAN SOCIETY FOR REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Le, Minh Tam
Nguyen, Thai Thanh Thi
Nguyen, Tung Thanh
Nguyen, Trung Van
Nguyen, Tam An Thi
Nguyen, Quoc Huy Vu
Cao, Thanh Ngoc
Does conventional freezing affect sperm DNA fragmentation?
title Does conventional freezing affect sperm DNA fragmentation?
title_full Does conventional freezing affect sperm DNA fragmentation?
title_fullStr Does conventional freezing affect sperm DNA fragmentation?
title_full_unstemmed Does conventional freezing affect sperm DNA fragmentation?
title_short Does conventional freezing affect sperm DNA fragmentation?
title_sort does conventional freezing affect sperm dna fragmentation?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6572667/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31181874
http://dx.doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2019.46.2.67
work_keys_str_mv AT leminhtam doesconventionalfreezingaffectspermdnafragmentation
AT nguyenthaithanhthi doesconventionalfreezingaffectspermdnafragmentation
AT nguyentungthanh doesconventionalfreezingaffectspermdnafragmentation
AT nguyentrungvan doesconventionalfreezingaffectspermdnafragmentation
AT nguyentamanthi doesconventionalfreezingaffectspermdnafragmentation
AT nguyenquochuyvu doesconventionalfreezingaffectspermdnafragmentation
AT caothanhngoc doesconventionalfreezingaffectspermdnafragmentation