Literature DB >> 26939021

Choice of underwear and male fecundity in a preconception cohort of couples.

K J Sapra1, M L Eisenberg2, S Kim3, Z Chen3, G M Buck Louis1.   

Abstract

Our objective was to investigate the relationship between male underwear-type worn during daytime/bedtime and male fecundity as measured by semen quality and time-to-pregnancy. We used data from a prospective preconception cohort conducted in 16 counties in Michigan and Texas, USA. 501 couples were enrolled and followed for 12 months of trying, which facilitated capture of time-to-pregnancy (in cycles), 6-cycle conception delay, and 12-month infertility. Male partners provided semen samples via in-home collection for next-day semen analysis comprised of 35 semen quality endpoints. At enrollment, men provided information on type of underwear worn during daytime and bedtime and were classified into 6 categories by underwear choice (n = 491): (i) briefs day/night, (ii) boxer-briefs day/night, (iii) boxers day/night, (iv) briefs day and boxers/none at night, (v) boxer-briefs day and boxers/none at night, (vi) boxers day and none at night. 473 (96%) men had semen analysis performed. Men switching from their usual daytime underwear to boxers/none for bed (groups 4, 5, 6) had the most evidence of change in semen quality endpoints (10 of 11 differences) relative to men wearing briefs day/night (group 1). Group 4 men had lower percent of sperm with coiled tail (β = -0.18, 95% CI: -0.35, -0.01), higher percent round (β = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.42), number of immature sperm (β = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.11, 0.77), and amplitude head displacement (β = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.10, 1.03). Group 5 men had higher sperm head perimeter (β=0.17, 95% CI: 0.002, 0.34), amplitude head displacement (β = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.03, 0.91), percent cytoplasmic droplet (β = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.11, 0.77) and high DNA stainability (β=0.39, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.78). After false discovery rate control, no differences remained significant. No significant differences in time-to-pregnancy, conception delay, or infertility were observed. In summary, male underwear choice is associated with few differences in semen parameters; no association with time-to-pregnancy is observed providing reassurance to couples attempting pregnancy. Published 2016. This article has been contributed to by US Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

Entities:  

Keywords:  infertility; lifestyle; semen quality; time-to-pregnancy; underwear

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26939021      PMCID: PMC6214186          DOI: 10.1111/andr.12163

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Andrology        ISSN: 2047-2919            Impact factor:   3.842


  34 in total

Review 1.  Sperm chromatin structure assay: its clinical use for detecting sperm DNA fragmentation in male infertility and comparisons with other techniques.

Authors:  Donald P Evenson; Kjersten L Larson; Lorna K Jost
Journal:  J Androl       Date:  2002 Jan-Feb

2.  Optimal power transformations for analysis of sperm concentration and other semen variables.

Authors:  David J Handelsman
Journal:  J Androl       Date:  2002 Sep-Oct

3.  Mild induced testicular and epididymal hyperthermia alters sperm chromatin integrity in men.

Authors:  Gulfam Ahmad; Nathalie Moinard; Camille Esquerré-Lamare; Roger Mieusset; Louis Bujan
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2012-01-21       Impact factor: 7.329

4.  The risk of infertility and delayed conception associated with exposures in the Danish workplace.

Authors:  P Rachootin; J Olsen
Journal:  J Occup Med       Date:  1983-05

Review 5.  Limitations of semen analysis as a test of male fertility and anticipated needs from newer tests.

Authors:  Christina Wang; Ronald S Swerdloff
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2014-11-25       Impact factor: 7.329

6.  Lifestyle and semen quality: role of modifiable risk factors.

Authors:  Joanna Jurewicz; Michał Radwan; Wojciech Sobala; Danuta Ligocka; Paweł Radwan; Michał Bochenek; Wojciech Hanke
Journal:  Syst Biol Reprod Med       Date:  2013-09-30       Impact factor: 3.061

7.  Evaluation of a container for collection and shipment of semen with potential uses in population-based, clinical, and occupational settings.

Authors:  M O Royster; D T Lobdell; P Mendola; S D Perreault; S G Selevan; S A Rothmann; W A Robbins
Journal:  J Androl       Date:  2000 May-Jun

8.  Modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors for poor semen quality: a case-referent study.

Authors:  A C Povey; J-A Clyma; R McNamee; H D Moore; H Baillie; A A Pacey; N M Cherry
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2012-06-12       Impact factor: 6.918

9.  The potential of mild testicular heating as a safe, effective and reversible contraceptive method for men.

Authors:  R Mieusset; L Bujan
Journal:  Int J Androl       Date:  1994-08

10.  Sperm recovery and survival: two tests that predict in vitro fertilization outcome.

Authors:  D W Stovall; D S Guzick; S L Berga; J S Krasnow; A J Zeleznik
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 7.329

View more
  1 in total

1.  Vitamins and antioxidants in the management of male fertility.

Authors:  Jason R Kovac
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2017 Jul-Sep
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.