Cargando…

Optimal timing for repeat semen analysis during male infertility evaluation

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the 4-week time period between semen analyses during the workup of male infertility is optimal and whether two samples are needed. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Tertiary hospital. PATIENT(S): Men whose semen samples were obtained within 90 days of each other, wit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Punjani, Nahid, Wald, Gal, Al-Hussein Alwamlh, Omar, Feliciano, Miriam, Dudley, Vanessa, Goldstein, Marc
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8267395/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34278350
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.xfre.2021.04.010
_version_ 1783720137473392640
author Punjani, Nahid
Wald, Gal
Al-Hussein Alwamlh, Omar
Feliciano, Miriam
Dudley, Vanessa
Goldstein, Marc
author_facet Punjani, Nahid
Wald, Gal
Al-Hussein Alwamlh, Omar
Feliciano, Miriam
Dudley, Vanessa
Goldstein, Marc
author_sort Punjani, Nahid
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the 4-week time period between semen analyses during the workup of male infertility is optimal and whether two samples are needed. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Tertiary hospital. PATIENT(S): Men whose semen samples were obtained within 90 days of each other, without known fertility intervention, treatment, and/or azoospermia. INTERVENTION(S): Semen analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Correlation between semen parameters and agreement among consecutive semen analyses. RESULT(S): A total of 2,150 semen samples from 1,075 men were included in the analysis. The optimal correlation for volume occurred at weeks 2, 8, and 12 (r = 0.803, r = 0.802, and r = 0.821, respectively). For concentration, the correlation was maximized at weeks 1, 4, and 5 (r = 0.950, r = 0.841, and r = 0.795, respectively). Total sperm count correlated at weeks 1, 2, and 4 (r = 0.929, r = 0.727, and r = 0.808, respectively). Motility was maximally correlated at weeks 1, 10, and 13 (r = 0.711, r = 0.760, and r = 0.708, respectively). Morphology was optimally correlated at weeks 1, 2, and 9 (r = 0.935, r = 0.815, and r = 0.839, respectively). Semen volume was correlated in 55% of men, sperm concentration in 64% of men, sperm motility in 52% of men and sperm morphology 64% of men. CONCLUSION(S): Our data suggest that four weeks may not be the optimal time for repeat semen analysis and that one sample is insufficient to assess any abnormalities in the result of semen analysis. The optimal time between repeat semen analyses should be individualized depending on the results of the initial analysis and additional factors, suggesting the need for future large-scale studies to investigate this trend.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8267395
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82673952021-07-16 Optimal timing for repeat semen analysis during male infertility evaluation Punjani, Nahid Wald, Gal Al-Hussein Alwamlh, Omar Feliciano, Miriam Dudley, Vanessa Goldstein, Marc F S Rep Original Article OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the 4-week time period between semen analyses during the workup of male infertility is optimal and whether two samples are needed. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Tertiary hospital. PATIENT(S): Men whose semen samples were obtained within 90 days of each other, without known fertility intervention, treatment, and/or azoospermia. INTERVENTION(S): Semen analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Correlation between semen parameters and agreement among consecutive semen analyses. RESULT(S): A total of 2,150 semen samples from 1,075 men were included in the analysis. The optimal correlation for volume occurred at weeks 2, 8, and 12 (r = 0.803, r = 0.802, and r = 0.821, respectively). For concentration, the correlation was maximized at weeks 1, 4, and 5 (r = 0.950, r = 0.841, and r = 0.795, respectively). Total sperm count correlated at weeks 1, 2, and 4 (r = 0.929, r = 0.727, and r = 0.808, respectively). Motility was maximally correlated at weeks 1, 10, and 13 (r = 0.711, r = 0.760, and r = 0.708, respectively). Morphology was optimally correlated at weeks 1, 2, and 9 (r = 0.935, r = 0.815, and r = 0.839, respectively). Semen volume was correlated in 55% of men, sperm concentration in 64% of men, sperm motility in 52% of men and sperm morphology 64% of men. CONCLUSION(S): Our data suggest that four weeks may not be the optimal time for repeat semen analysis and that one sample is insufficient to assess any abnormalities in the result of semen analysis. The optimal time between repeat semen analyses should be individualized depending on the results of the initial analysis and additional factors, suggesting the need for future large-scale studies to investigate this trend. Elsevier 2021-06-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8267395/ /pubmed/34278350 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.xfre.2021.04.010 Text en © 2021 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Punjani, Nahid
Wald, Gal
Al-Hussein Alwamlh, Omar
Feliciano, Miriam
Dudley, Vanessa
Goldstein, Marc
Optimal timing for repeat semen analysis during male infertility evaluation
title Optimal timing for repeat semen analysis during male infertility evaluation
title_full Optimal timing for repeat semen analysis during male infertility evaluation
title_fullStr Optimal timing for repeat semen analysis during male infertility evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Optimal timing for repeat semen analysis during male infertility evaluation
title_short Optimal timing for repeat semen analysis during male infertility evaluation
title_sort optimal timing for repeat semen analysis during male infertility evaluation
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8267395/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34278350
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.xfre.2021.04.010
work_keys_str_mv AT punjaninahid optimaltimingforrepeatsemenanalysisduringmaleinfertilityevaluation
AT waldgal optimaltimingforrepeatsemenanalysisduringmaleinfertilityevaluation
AT alhusseinalwamlhomar optimaltimingforrepeatsemenanalysisduringmaleinfertilityevaluation
AT felicianomiriam optimaltimingforrepeatsemenanalysisduringmaleinfertilityevaluation
AT dudleyvanessa optimaltimingforrepeatsemenanalysisduringmaleinfertilityevaluation
AT goldsteinmarc optimaltimingforrepeatsemenanalysisduringmaleinfertilityevaluation