Cargando…

Cumulative live birth rates after IVF/ICSI cycles with sperm prepared by density gradient centrifugation vs. swim-up: a retrospective study using a propensity score-matching analysis

BACKGROUND: Density gradient centrifugation (DGC) and swim-up (SU) are the two most widely used sperm preparation methods for in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). However, existing comparisons of IVF/ICSI outcomes following these sperm preparation methods are ins...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rao, Meng, Tang, Li, Wang, Longda, Chen, Mengxiang, Yan, Gaofeng, Zhao, Shuhua
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8969370/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35361225
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12958-022-00933-2
_version_ 1784679231696928768
author Rao, Meng
Tang, Li
Wang, Longda
Chen, Mengxiang
Yan, Gaofeng
Zhao, Shuhua
author_facet Rao, Meng
Tang, Li
Wang, Longda
Chen, Mengxiang
Yan, Gaofeng
Zhao, Shuhua
author_sort Rao, Meng
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Density gradient centrifugation (DGC) and swim-up (SU) are the two most widely used sperm preparation methods for in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). However, existing comparisons of IVF/ICSI outcomes following these sperm preparation methods are insufficient and controversial. METHODS: This retrospective study included all first autologous IVF and ICSI cycles performed between March 1, 2016, and December 31, 2020 in a single university-based center. A total of 3608 cycles were matched between DGC and SU using propensity score (PS) matching for potential confounding factors at a ratio of 1:1. The primary outcome was the cumulative live birth rate (cLBR) per aspiration. RESULTS: PS matching provided 719 cycles after DGC and 719 cycles after SU. After adjusting for confounders, the recovery rate, progressive motility rate after sperm preparation, fertilization rate, good-quality embryo rate, and blastocyst formation rate were similar between the DGC and SU groups. The cLBR (odds ratio [OR] = 1.143, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.893–1.461) and LBR per transfer (OR = 1.082, 95% CI: 0.896–1.307) were also not significantly different between the groups. Furthermore, no significant differences were found in all of the laboratory and clinical outcomes following conventional IVF or ICSI cycles between the two groups. However, a significantly higher fertilization rate (β = 0.074, 95% CI: 0.008–0.140) was observed when using poor-quality sperm in the DGC group than in the SU group. CONCLUSIONS: Sperm preparation using DGC and SU separately resulted in similar IVF/ICSI outcomes. Further studies are warranted to compare the effects of these methods on IVF/ICSI outcomes when using sperm from subgroups of different quality. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12958-022-00933-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8969370
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89693702022-04-01 Cumulative live birth rates after IVF/ICSI cycles with sperm prepared by density gradient centrifugation vs. swim-up: a retrospective study using a propensity score-matching analysis Rao, Meng Tang, Li Wang, Longda Chen, Mengxiang Yan, Gaofeng Zhao, Shuhua Reprod Biol Endocrinol Research BACKGROUND: Density gradient centrifugation (DGC) and swim-up (SU) are the two most widely used sperm preparation methods for in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). However, existing comparisons of IVF/ICSI outcomes following these sperm preparation methods are insufficient and controversial. METHODS: This retrospective study included all first autologous IVF and ICSI cycles performed between March 1, 2016, and December 31, 2020 in a single university-based center. A total of 3608 cycles were matched between DGC and SU using propensity score (PS) matching for potential confounding factors at a ratio of 1:1. The primary outcome was the cumulative live birth rate (cLBR) per aspiration. RESULTS: PS matching provided 719 cycles after DGC and 719 cycles after SU. After adjusting for confounders, the recovery rate, progressive motility rate after sperm preparation, fertilization rate, good-quality embryo rate, and blastocyst formation rate were similar between the DGC and SU groups. The cLBR (odds ratio [OR] = 1.143, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.893–1.461) and LBR per transfer (OR = 1.082, 95% CI: 0.896–1.307) were also not significantly different between the groups. Furthermore, no significant differences were found in all of the laboratory and clinical outcomes following conventional IVF or ICSI cycles between the two groups. However, a significantly higher fertilization rate (β = 0.074, 95% CI: 0.008–0.140) was observed when using poor-quality sperm in the DGC group than in the SU group. CONCLUSIONS: Sperm preparation using DGC and SU separately resulted in similar IVF/ICSI outcomes. Further studies are warranted to compare the effects of these methods on IVF/ICSI outcomes when using sperm from subgroups of different quality. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12958-022-00933-2. BioMed Central 2022-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC8969370/ /pubmed/35361225 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12958-022-00933-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Rao, Meng
Tang, Li
Wang, Longda
Chen, Mengxiang
Yan, Gaofeng
Zhao, Shuhua
Cumulative live birth rates after IVF/ICSI cycles with sperm prepared by density gradient centrifugation vs. swim-up: a retrospective study using a propensity score-matching analysis
title Cumulative live birth rates after IVF/ICSI cycles with sperm prepared by density gradient centrifugation vs. swim-up: a retrospective study using a propensity score-matching analysis
title_full Cumulative live birth rates after IVF/ICSI cycles with sperm prepared by density gradient centrifugation vs. swim-up: a retrospective study using a propensity score-matching analysis
title_fullStr Cumulative live birth rates after IVF/ICSI cycles with sperm prepared by density gradient centrifugation vs. swim-up: a retrospective study using a propensity score-matching analysis
title_full_unstemmed Cumulative live birth rates after IVF/ICSI cycles with sperm prepared by density gradient centrifugation vs. swim-up: a retrospective study using a propensity score-matching analysis
title_short Cumulative live birth rates after IVF/ICSI cycles with sperm prepared by density gradient centrifugation vs. swim-up: a retrospective study using a propensity score-matching analysis
title_sort cumulative live birth rates after ivf/icsi cycles with sperm prepared by density gradient centrifugation vs. swim-up: a retrospective study using a propensity score-matching analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8969370/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35361225
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12958-022-00933-2
work_keys_str_mv AT raomeng cumulativelivebirthratesafterivficsicycleswithspermpreparedbydensitygradientcentrifugationvsswimuparetrospectivestudyusingapropensityscorematchinganalysis
AT tangli cumulativelivebirthratesafterivficsicycleswithspermpreparedbydensitygradientcentrifugationvsswimuparetrospectivestudyusingapropensityscorematchinganalysis
AT wanglongda cumulativelivebirthratesafterivficsicycleswithspermpreparedbydensitygradientcentrifugationvsswimuparetrospectivestudyusingapropensityscorematchinganalysis
AT chenmengxiang cumulativelivebirthratesafterivficsicycleswithspermpreparedbydensitygradientcentrifugationvsswimuparetrospectivestudyusingapropensityscorematchinganalysis
AT yangaofeng cumulativelivebirthratesafterivficsicycleswithspermpreparedbydensitygradientcentrifugationvsswimuparetrospectivestudyusingapropensityscorematchinganalysis
AT zhaoshuhua cumulativelivebirthratesafterivficsicycleswithspermpreparedbydensitygradientcentrifugationvsswimuparetrospectivestudyusingapropensityscorematchinganalysis