Miki Haifler1, Pinhas Girshovitz2, Gili Band3, Gili Dardikman2, Igal Madjar3, Natan T Shaked4. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat Aviv, Israel; Department of Urology, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel. 2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat Aviv, Israel. 3. Male Fertility Clinic, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel. 4. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat Aviv, Israel. Electronic address: nshaked@post.tau.ac.il.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare label-free interferometric phase microscopy (IPM) to label-free and label-based bright-field microscopy (BFM) in evaluating sperm cell morphology. This comparison helps in evaluating the potential of IPM for clinical sperm analysis without staining. DESIGN: Comparison of imaging modalities. SETTING: University laboratory. PATIENT(S): Sperm samples were obtained from healthy sperm donors. INTERVENTION(S): We evaluated 350 sperm cells, using portable IPM and BFM, according to World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. The parameters evaluated were length and width of the sperm head and midpiece; size and width of the acrosome; head, midpiece, and tail configuration; and general normality of the cell. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Continuous variables were compared using the Student's t test. Categorical variables were compared with the χ(2) test of independence. Sensitivity and specificity of IPM and label-free BFM were calculated and compared with label-based BFM. RESULT(S): No statistical differences were found between IPM and label-based BFM in the WHO criteria. In contrast, IPM measurements of head and midpiece width and acrosome area were different from those of label-free BFM. Sensitivity and specificity of IPM were higher than those of label-free BFM for the WHO criteria. CONCLUSION(S): Label-free IPM can identify sperm cell abnormalities, with an excellent correlation with label-based BFM, and with higher accuracy compared with label-free BFM. Further prospective clinical trials are required to enable IPM as part of clinical sperm selection procedures.
OBJECTIVE: To compare label-free interferometric phase microscopy (IPM) to label-free and label-based bright-field microscopy (BFM) in evaluating sperm cell morphology. This comparison helps in evaluating the potential of IPM for clinical sperm analysis without staining. DESIGN: Comparison of imaging modalities. SETTING: University laboratory. PATIENT(S): Sperm samples were obtained from healthy sperm donors. INTERVENTION(S): We evaluated 350 sperm cells, using portable IPM and BFM, according to World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. The parameters evaluated were length and width of the sperm head and midpiece; size and width of the acrosome; head, midpiece, and tail configuration; and general normality of the cell. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Continuous variables were compared using the Student's t test. Categorical variables were compared with the χ(2) test of independence. Sensitivity and specificity of IPM and label-free BFM were calculated and compared with label-based BFM. RESULT(S): No statistical differences were found between IPM and label-based BFM in the WHO criteria. In contrast, IPM measurements of head and midpiece width and acrosome area were different from those of label-free BFM. Sensitivity and specificity of IPM were higher than those of label-free BFM for the WHO criteria. CONCLUSION(S): Label-free IPM can identify sperm cell abnormalities, with an excellent correlation with label-based BFM, and with higher accuracy compared with label-free BFM. Further prospective clinical trials are required to enable IPM as part of clinical sperm selection procedures.
Authors: Annalisa De Angelis; Maria Antonietta Ferrara; Gianfranco Coppola; Loredana Di Matteo; Laura Siani; Brian Dale; Giuseppe Coppola; Anna Chiara De Luca Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-03-18 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Mikhail E Kandel; Marcello Rubessa; Yuchen R He; Sierra Schreiber; Sasha Meyers; Luciana Matter Naves; Molly K Sermersheim; G Scott Sell; Michael J Szewczyk; Nahil Sobh; Matthew B Wheeler; Gabriel Popescu Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2020-07-20 Impact factor: 11.205