Koray Yildiz1, Sengul Yuksel2. 1. Doğu Fertil IVF Center, Malatya, Turkey. 2. Department of Medical Biology and Genetics, Medicine Faculty, School of Medicine, Inonu University, 44280, Malatya, Turkey. sengul.yuksel@inonu.edu.tr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: It is known that sperm preparation techniques in in vitro fertilisation (IVF) are intended to select the best-quality sperm. The aim of this study is to compare sperm the density gradient method and microfluidic chip (Fertile Plus) method in infertile patients by analysing fertilisation rates, pregnancy rates, and sperm morphology and DNA fragmentation rates posed by these two methods. METHODS: Using semen samples obtained from the patients, sperms were prepared with gradient (n = 312) and microfluidic chip methods (n = 116). Fertilisation and pregnancy rates were compared in the first time and in the recurrent IVF trial patients. In addition, the morphology and DNA fragmentation comparison of sperm samples were evaluated by Toluidine blue in situ chemical staining method. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between fertilisation and pregnancy rates when compared with study groups in first-time IVF treatment patients. However, in recurrent IVF failure patients, there was a significant difference in fertilisation rates but no statistically significant difference was found in pregnancy rates. The microfluidic chip method significantly decreased sperm DNA fragmentation index according to density gradient method. CONCLUSIONS: Microfluidic chip method may be recommended in patients with recurrent unsuccessful in vitro trials. The sperm DNA fragmentation test prior to the treatment will be helpful in selecting the appropriate sperm-washing method.
PURPOSE: It is known that sperm preparation techniques in in vitro fertilisation (IVF) are intended to select the best-quality sperm. The aim of this study is to compare sperm the density gradient method and microfluidic chip (Fertile Plus) method in infertilepatients by analysing fertilisation rates, pregnancy rates, and sperm morphology and DNA fragmentation rates posed by these two methods. METHODS: Using semen samples obtained from the patients, sperms were prepared with gradient (n = 312) and microfluidic chip methods (n = 116). Fertilisation and pregnancy rates were compared in the first time and in the recurrent IVF trial patients. In addition, the morphology and DNA fragmentation comparison of sperm samples were evaluated by Toluidine blue in situ chemical staining method. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between fertilisation and pregnancy rates when compared with study groups in first-time IVF treatment patients. However, in recurrent IVF failurepatients, there was a significant difference in fertilisation rates but no statistically significant difference was found in pregnancy rates. The microfluidic chip method significantly decreased sperm DNA fragmentation index according to density gradient method. CONCLUSIONS: Microfluidic chip method may be recommended in patients with recurrent unsuccessful in vitro trials. The sperm DNA fragmentation test prior to the treatment will be helpful in selecting the appropriate sperm-washing method.
Entities:
Keywords:
DNA fragmentation; IVF; Microfluidic chip; Sperm