BACKGROUND: One major limitation in the use of sperm DNA fragmentation as measured by the TdT (terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase)-mediated dUTP nick-end labelling (TUNEL) assay is the paucity of solid data on the stability of this parameter. METHODS: The objective of our study was to evaluate variations in the degree of sperm DNA fragmentation, as measured by the TUNEL assay, over a 6 month period. Five donors provided semen samples (total 107) on the average three times per month, and 10 infertility patients provided semen samples every 4 weeks (total 58). RESULTS: The mean percentage of sperm DNA fragmentation for donors was 13.18%, the within-donor standard deviation (SD(W) = 3.79%) was small compared to between-donor (SD(B) = 17.56%). For the group of patients, the mean percentage of sperm DNA fragmentation was 22.44%, with SD(W) of 4.43% within patients and SD(B) of 29.48% between patients. No seasonal rhythm was observed during the study. The intra-class correlation coefficient for all subjects combined was 0.83. Compared to sperm concentration, individual coefficients of variation for sperm DNA fragmentation indicated less variability in four subjects, but were similar in the others. CONCLUSION: This longitudinal study shows that sperm DNA fragmentation is a parameter with good stability (repeatability) over time; it can be taken as a baseline both in healthy fertile men and in patients from infertility couples.
BACKGROUND: One major limitation in the use of sperm DNA fragmentation as measured by the TdT (terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase)-mediated dUTP nick-end labelling (TUNEL) assay is the paucity of solid data on the stability of this parameter. METHODS: The objective of our study was to evaluate variations in the degree of sperm DNA fragmentation, as measured by the TUNEL assay, over a 6 month period. Five donors provided semen samples (total 107) on the average three times per month, and 10 infertilitypatients provided semen samples every 4 weeks (total 58). RESULTS: The mean percentage of sperm DNA fragmentation for donors was 13.18%, the within-donor standard deviation (SD(W) = 3.79%) was small compared to between-donor (SD(B) = 17.56%). For the group of patients, the mean percentage of sperm DNA fragmentation was 22.44%, with SD(W) of 4.43% within patients and SD(B) of 29.48% between patients. No seasonal rhythm was observed during the study. The intra-class correlation coefficient for all subjects combined was 0.83. Compared to sperm concentration, individual coefficients of variation for sperm DNA fragmentation indicated less variability in four subjects, but were similar in the others. CONCLUSION: This longitudinal study shows that sperm DNA fragmentation is a parameter with good stability (repeatability) over time; it can be taken as a baseline both in healthy fertile men and in patients from infertility couples.
Authors: Sandro C Esteves; Armand Zini; Robert Matthew Coward; Donald P Evenson; Jaime Gosálvez; Sheena E M Lewis; Rakesh Sharma; Peter Humaidan Journal: Andrologia Date: 2020-10-27 Impact factor: 2.775