Literature DB >> 27529487

Uncertainty of measurement and clinical value of semen analysis: has standardisation through professional guidelines helped or hindered progress?

M J Tomlinson1.   

Abstract

This article suggests that diagnostic semen analysis has no more clinical value today than it had 25-30 years ago, and both the confusion surrounding its evidence base (in terms of relationship with conception) and the low level of confidence in the clinical setting is attributable to an associated high level of 'uncertainty'. Consideration of the concept of measurement uncertainty is mandatory for medical laboratories applying for the ISO15189 standard. It is evident that the entire semen analysis process is prone to error every step from specimen collection to the reporting of results and serves to compound uncertainty associated with diagnosis or prognosis. Perceived adherence to published guidelines for the assessment of sperm concentration, motility and morphology does not guarantee a reliable and reproducible test result. Moreover, the high level of uncertainty associated with manual sperm motility and morphology can be attributed to subjectivity and lack a traceable standard. This article describes where and why uncertainty exists and suggests that semen analysis will continue to be of limited value until it is more adequately considered and addressed. Although professional guidelines for good practice have provided the foundations for testing procedures for many years, the risk in following rather prescriptive guidance to the letter is that unless they are based on an overwhelmingly firm evidence base, the quality of semen analysis will remain poor and the progress towards the development of more innovative methods for investigating male infertility will be slow.
© 2016 American Society of Andrology and European Academy of Andrology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  accreditation; infertility; semen analysis; sperm quality parameters; uncertainty

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27529487     DOI: 10.1111/andr.12209

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


  9 in total

1.  Semen evaluation: methodological advancements in sperm quality-specific fertility assessment - A review.

Authors:  Bereket Molla Tanga; Ahmad Yar Qamar; Sanan Raza; Seonggyu Bang; Xun Fang; Kiyoung Yoon; Jongki Cho
Journal:  Anim Biosci       Date:  2021-04-23

2.  Machine Learning-Based Analysis of Sperm Videos and Participant Data for Male Fertility Prediction.

Authors:  Steven A Hicks; Jorunn M Andersen; Oliwia Witczak; Vajira Thambawita; Pål Halvorsen; Hugo L Hammer; Trine B Haugen; Michael A Riegler
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Simplified sperm testing devices: a possible tool to overcome lack of accessibility and inconsistency in male factor infertility diagnosis. An opportunity for low- and middle- income countries.

Authors:  J Onofre; L Geenen; A Cox; I Van Der Auwera; F Willendrup; E Andersen; R Campo; N Dhont; W Ombelet
Journal:  Facts Views Vis Obgyn       Date:  2021-03-31

Review 4.  Defining new genetic etiologies of male infertility: progress and future prospects.

Authors:  Albert Salas-Huetos; Kenneth I Aston
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-03

Review 5.  A Novel Approach to Improving the Reliability of Manual Semen Analysis: A Paradigm Shift in the Workup of Infertile Men.

Authors:  Christopher Douglas; Neel Parekh; Linda G Kahn; Ralf Henkel; Ashok Agarwal
Journal:  World J Mens Health       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 5.400

6.  Qualitative and quantitative assessment of sperm miRNAs identifies hsa-miR-9-3p, hsa-miR-30b-5p and hsa-miR-122-5p as potential biomarkers of male infertility and sperm quality.

Authors:  Meghali Joshi; Syed Waseem Andrabi; Ranjeet Kumar Yadav; Satya Narayan Sankhwar; Gopal Gupta; Singh Rajender
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2022-08-15       Impact factor: 4.982

7.  Do studies published in two leading reproduction journals between 2011 and 2020 demonstrate that they followed WHO5 recommendations for basic semen analysis?

Authors:  A L Vasconcelos; M J Campbell; C L R Barratt; S A Gellatly
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2022-09-30       Impact factor: 6.353

8.  1H Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy of live human sperm.

Authors:  S Reynolds; S J Calvert; M N Paley; A A Pacey
Journal:  Mol Hum Reprod       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 4.025

9.  External quality control and training of semen analysis in the Netherlands: starting point for further reduction of outcome variability.

Authors:  Louise Lemmens; Leonie van den Hoven; Netty J van Vrouwerff; Didi Dm Braat; Willianne Ldm Nelen; Marian A Spath; Alex Mm Wetzels
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2022 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.285

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.