Martin J Campbell1, Francesco Lotti2, Elisabetta Baldi3, Stefan Schlatt4, Mario P R Festin5, Lars Björndahl6, Igor Toskin7, Christopher L R Barratt1. 1. Division of Systems Medicine, School of Medicine, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland. 2. Andrology, Female Endocrinology and Gender Incongruence Unit, Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences "Mario Serio", University of Florence, Florence, Italy. 3. Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. 4. Centre of Reproductive Medicine and Andrology, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany. 5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of the Philippines College of Medicine, Philippine General Hospital, Ermita, Manila, Philippines. 6. Andrology Laboratory, ANOVA - Karolinska University Hospital & Karolinska Instiutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 7. Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research (SRH), World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is now 11 years since publication of the WHO 2010 guidelines for semen assessment values, and it is critical to determine whether they are still valid and/or whether they should be modified. OBJECTIVES: To utilise data published since 2010 and combine these with data used in the 2010 assessment to provide an updated and more comprehensive representation of the fertile man. This may be utilised to present an updated distribution of values for use by WHO in 2021. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two specific analyses were performed namely, (1) Analysis 1: Examination of published data following publication of WHO 2010 [termed 2010-2020 data]. (2) Analysis 2: Examination of the data used to help formulate the 2010 distribution of values combined with the data from Analysis (1) [termed WHO 2020]. RESULTS: In total, data from more than 3500 subjects, from twelve countries and five continents were analysed. The 5th centile values for concentration, motility and morphology are: 16 × 106 /ml, 30% progressive motility [42% total motility] and 4% normal forms. DISCUSSION: This study presents substantial additional information to establish more comprehensive and globally applicable lower reference values for semen parameters for fertile men although they do not represent distinct limits between fertile and subfertile men. There are still data missing from many countries and, some geographical regions are not represented. Moreover, the number of subjects although significant is still relatively low (<4000). CONCLUSION: These distributions of values now include semen analysis providing a more global representation of the fertile man. Increasing the number of subjects provides robust information that is also more geographically representative.
BACKGROUND: It is now 11 years since publication of the WHO 2010 guidelines for semen assessment values, and it is critical to determine whether they are still valid and/or whether they should be modified. OBJECTIVES: To utilise data published since 2010 and combine these with data used in the 2010 assessment to provide an updated and more comprehensive representation of the fertile man. This may be utilised to present an updated distribution of values for use by WHO in 2021. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two specific analyses were performed namely, (1) Analysis 1: Examination of published data following publication of WHO 2010 [termed 2010-2020 data]. (2) Analysis 2: Examination of the data used to help formulate the 2010 distribution of values combined with the data from Analysis (1) [termed WHO 2020]. RESULTS: In total, data from more than 3500 subjects, from twelve countries and five continents were analysed. The 5th centile values for concentration, motility and morphology are: 16 × 106 /ml, 30% progressive motility [42% total motility] and 4% normal forms. DISCUSSION: This study presents substantial additional information to establish more comprehensive and globally applicable lower reference values for semen parameters for fertile men although they do not represent distinct limits between fertile and subfertile men. There are still data missing from many countries and, some geographical regions are not represented. Moreover, the number of subjects although significant is still relatively low (<4000). CONCLUSION: These distributions of values now include semen analysis providing a more global representation of the fertile man. Increasing the number of subjects provides robust information that is also more geographically representative.
Authors: Guy Shrem; Liat Azani; Ido Feferkorn; Tamar Listovsky; Sofia Hussaini; Benjamin Farber; Michael H Dahan; Mali Salmon-Divon Journal: Life (Basel) Date: 2022-06-20