G M Centola1, R Herko, E Andolina, S Weisensel. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Rochester Medical Center, New York 14642, USA. grace_centola@urmc.rochester.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the Enhance (Percoll; Conception Technologies, San Diego, CA) and PureSperm (Gen X International, Madison, CT) sperm preparation methods with respect to recovery (percentage of motile sperm), motility (%), path and progressive velocities (microm/s), and hyperactivation (%). DESIGN: Comparison of sperm processing methods. SETTING: University medical center-based clinical andrology laboratory and infertility program. PATIENT(S): Twenty-five men who presented for semen analysis. INTERVENTION(S): Each of 25 semen specimens were divided and each aliquot was prepared using two different density gradient centrifugation methods. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The motile sperm recovery, percent motility, motion parameters, and percent hyperactivation were measured for each semen specimen (n=25) before and after separation with the use of the two methods. RESULT(S): There was no difference in the percent motility and motile count between specimens prepared with Enhance (Percoll) and PureSperm and fresh specimens. Statistically significant differences were found (fresh versus test) in the velocities and in hyperactivation (PureSperm only), and no differences were found between the processing methods. CONCLUSION(S): PureSperm appears to be as effective as Percoll (Enhance) for the recovery of good, progressively motile sperm for use in IUI or other assisted reproductive techniques.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the Enhance (Percoll; Conception Technologies, San Diego, CA) and PureSperm (Gen X International, Madison, CT) sperm preparation methods with respect to recovery (percentage of motile sperm), motility (%), path and progressive velocities (microm/s), and hyperactivation (%). DESIGN: Comparison of sperm processing methods. SETTING: University medical center-based clinical andrology laboratory and infertility program. PATIENT(S): Twenty-five men who presented for semen analysis. INTERVENTION(S): Each of 25 semen specimens were divided and each aliquot was prepared using two different density gradient centrifugation methods. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The motile sperm recovery, percent motility, motion parameters, and percent hyperactivation were measured for each semen specimen (n=25) before and after separation with the use of the two methods. RESULT(S): There was no difference in the percent motility and motile count between specimens prepared with Enhance (Percoll) and PureSperm and fresh specimens. Statistically significant differences were found (fresh versus test) in the velocities and in hyperactivation (PureSperm only), and no differences were found between the processing methods. CONCLUSION(S): PureSperm appears to be as effective as Percoll (Enhance) for the recovery of good, progressively motile sperm for use in IUI or other assisted reproductive techniques.