Irene Hervas1, Maria Gil Julia2, Rocío Rivera-Egea3, Ana Navarro-Gomezlechon2, Laura Mossetti2, Nicolás Garrido2. 1. IVI Foundation, Health Research Institute, La Fe (IIS La Fe), Av. Fernando Abril Martorell, nº106, Torre A, Planta 1ª, 46026, Valencia, Spain. irene.hervas@ivirma.com. 2. IVI Foundation, Health Research Institute, La Fe (IIS La Fe), Av. Fernando Abril Martorell, nº106, Torre A, Planta 1ª, 46026, Valencia, Spain. 3. Andrology Laboratory and Sperm Bank, IVIRMA Valencia, Plaza de la Policia Local 3, 46015, Valencia, Spain.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The use of testicular sperm is confined to patients with azoospermia, but there is evidence to support its use in males with poor semen parameters and/or previous intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) failures with ejaculated spermatozoa. We compared the aneuploidy rate and quality between embryos derived from ICSI cycles with ejaculated sperm (EJ-ICSI) and those from ICSI cycles using testicular spermatozoa (TT-ICSI) within the same couple. METHODS: Retrospective study of 27 couples who first underwent an EJ-ICSI cycle that did not result in a livebirth and afterwards a TT-ICSI cycle. Only the two closer cycles of each couple were included. Preimplantation genetic test for aneuploidies (PGT-A) was performed in both ICSI cycles and classic parameters of embryo quality were assessed until blastocyst-stage. RESULTS: A total of 375 embryos from 54 ICSI cycles were evaluated. Aneuploidy rate was measured by two different parameters. Patients undergoing TT-ICSI presented a similar aneuploidy rate as EJ-ICSI group: 30.7% (23.4-38.0) vs 26.8% (18.1-35.5) per inseminated oocytes (P>0.05), and 76.2% (66.2-86.2) vs 72.1% (59.1-85.2) per the total number of biopsied embryos (P>0.05), respectively. Further, the good-quality blastocyst rate per correctly fertilized oocyte was significantly higher in TT-ICSI group (33.6% (30.4-36.9)) than EJ-ICSI group (24.2% (20.3-28.0)) (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Switching to testicular sperm for ICSI yielded better-quality blastocysts without affecting the chromosomal load of the embryos in non-azoospermic couples with a previous unsuccessful ICSI using ejaculated sperm. This strategy is a good option for couples seeking a livebirth who do not want to use donor sperm.
PURPOSE: The use of testicular sperm is confined to patients with azoospermia, but there is evidence to support its use in males with poor semen parameters and/or previous intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) failures with ejaculated spermatozoa. We compared the aneuploidy rate and quality between embryos derived from ICSI cycles with ejaculated sperm (EJ-ICSI) and those from ICSI cycles using testicular spermatozoa (TT-ICSI) within the same couple. METHODS: Retrospective study of 27 couples who first underwent an EJ-ICSI cycle that did not result in a livebirth and afterwards a TT-ICSI cycle. Only the two closer cycles of each couple were included. Preimplantation genetic test for aneuploidies (PGT-A) was performed in both ICSI cycles and classic parameters of embryo quality were assessed until blastocyst-stage. RESULTS: A total of 375 embryos from 54 ICSI cycles were evaluated. Aneuploidy rate was measured by two different parameters. Patients undergoing TT-ICSI presented a similar aneuploidy rate as EJ-ICSI group: 30.7% (23.4-38.0) vs 26.8% (18.1-35.5) per inseminated oocytes (P>0.05), and 76.2% (66.2-86.2) vs 72.1% (59.1-85.2) per the total number of biopsied embryos (P>0.05), respectively. Further, the good-quality blastocyst rate per correctly fertilized oocyte was significantly higher in TT-ICSI group (33.6% (30.4-36.9)) than EJ-ICSI group (24.2% (20.3-28.0)) (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Switching to testicular sperm for ICSI yielded better-quality blastocysts without affecting the chromosomal load of the embryos in non-azoospermic couples with a previous unsuccessful ICSI using ejaculated sperm. This strategy is a good option for couples seeking a livebirth who do not want to use donor sperm.
Authors: Ariel Weissman; Eran Horowitz; Amir Ravhon; Hana Nahum; Abraham Golan; David Levran Journal: Reprod Biomed Online Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 3.828