Total motile sperm count: a better indicator for the severity of male factor infertility than the WHO sperm classification system.

Does the prewash total motile sperm count (TMSC) have a better predictive value for spontaneous ongoing pregnancy (SOP) than the World Health Organization (WHO) classification system? The prewash TMSC shows a better correlation with the spontaneous ongoing pregnancy rate (SOPR) than the WHO 2010 classification system. According to the WHO classification system, an abnormal semen analysis can be diagnosed as oligozoospermia, astenozoospermia, teratozoospermia or combinations of these and azoospermia. This classification is based on the fifth percentile cut-off values of a cohort of 1953 men with proven fertility. Although this classification suggests accuracy, the relevance for the prognosis of an infertile couple and the choice of treatment is questionable. The TMSC is obtained by multiplying the sample volume by the density and the percentage of A and B motility spermatozoa. We analyzed data from a longitudinal cohort study among unselected infertile couples who were referred to three Dutch hospitals between January 2002 and December 2006. Of the total cohort of 2476 infertile couples, only the couples with either male infertility as a single diagnosis or unexplained infertility were included (n = 1177) with a follow-up period of 3 years. In all couples a semen analysis was performed. Based on the best semen analysis if more tests were performed, couples were grouped according to the WHO classification system and the TMSC range, as described in the Dutch national guidelines for male infertility. The primary outcome measure was the SOPR, which occurred before, during or after treatments, including expectant management, intrauterine insemination, in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. After adjustment for the confounding factors (female and male age, duration and type of infertility and result of the postcoital test) the odd ratios (ORs) for risk of SOP for each WHO and TMSC group were calculated. The couples with unexplained infertility were used as reference. A total of 514 couples did and 663 couples did not achieve a SOP. All WHO groups have a lower SOPR compared with the unexplained group (ORs varying from 0.136 to 0.397). Comparing the couples within the abnormal WHO groups, there are no significant differences in SOPR, except when oligoasthenoteratozoospermia is compared with asthenozoospermia [OR 0.501 (95% CI 0.311-0.809)] and teratozoospermia [OR 0.499 (95% CI: 0.252-0.988)], and oligoasthenozoospermia is compared with asthenozoospermia [OR 0.572 (95% CI: 0.373-0.877)]. All TMSC groups have a significantly lower SOPR compared with the unexplained group (ORs varying from 0.171 to 0.461). Couples with a TMSC of <1 × 10(6) and 1-5 × 10(6) have significantly lower SOPR compared with couples with a TMSC of 5-10 × 10(6) [respectively, OR 0.371 (95% CI: 0.215-0.64) and OR 0.505 (95% CI: 0.307-0.832)]. To include all SOPs during the follow-up period of 3 years, couples were not censured at the start of treatment. Roughly, three prognostic groups can be discerned: couples with a TMSC <5, couples with a TMSC between 5 and 20 and couples with a TMSC of more than 20 × 10(6) spermatozoa. We suggest using TMSC as the method of choice to express severity of male infertility. None.

Hamilton JA ，Cissen M ，Brandes M ，Smeenk JM ，de Bruin JP ，Kremer JA ，Nelen WL ，Hamilton CJ ... -  《-》

The Effects of Total Motile Sperm Count on Spontaneous Pregnancy Rate and Pregnancy After IUI Treatment in Couples with Male Factor and Unexplained Infertility.

Hajder M ，Hajder E ，Husic A 《-》

Semen parameter thresholds and time-to-conception in subfertile couples: how high is high enough?

What thresholds for total sperm count, sperm concentration, progressive motility, and total progressive motile sperm count (TPMC) are associated with earlier time-to-conception in couples undergoing fertility evaluation? Values well above the World Health Organization (WHO) references for total sperm count, concentration, and progressive motility, and values up to 100 million for TPMC were consistently associated with earlier time-to-conception and higher conception rates. Although individual semen parameters are generally not able to distinguish between fertile and infertile men, they can provide clinically useful information on time-to-pregnancy for counseling patients seeking fertility treatment. Compared to the conventional semen parameters, TPMC might be a better index for evaluating the severity of male infertility. We used data from a longitudinal cohort study on subfertile men from 2002 to 2017 and included 6061 men with initial semen analysis (SA) in the study. Men from subfertile couples who underwent a SA within the study period were included, and 5-year follow-up data were collected to capture conception data. Couples were further categorized into two subgroups: natural conception (n = 5126), after separating those who achieved conception using ART or IUI; natural conception without major female factor (n = 3753), after separating those with severe female factor infertility diagnoses. TPMC was calculated by multiplying the semen volume (ml) by sperm concentration (million/ml) and the percentage of progressively motile sperm (%). Cox proportional hazard models were used to report hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs before and after adjusting for male age, the number of previous children before the first SA, and income. Using the regression tree method, we calculated thresholds for total sperm count, sperm concentration, progressive motility, and TPMC to best differentiate those who were more likely to conceive within 5 years after first SA from those less likely to conceive. We also plotted continuous values of semen parameters in predicting 5-year conception rates and time-to-conception. Overall, the median time to conception was 22 months (95% CI: 21-23). A total of 3957 (65%) couples were known to have achieved conception within 5 years of the first SA. These patients were younger and had higher values of sperm concentration, progressive motility, and TPMC. In the overall cohort, a TPMC of 50 million best differentiated men who were more likely to father a child within 5 years. Partners of men with TPMC ≥50 million had a 45% greater chance of conception within 5 years in the adjusted model (HR: 1.45; 95% CI: 1.34-1.58) and achieved pregnancy earlier compared to those men with TPMC < 50 million (median 19 months (95% CI: 18-20) versus 36 months (95% CI: 32-41)). Similar results were observed in the natural conception cohort. For the natural conception cohort without major female factor, the TPMC cut-off was 20 million. In the visual assessment of the graphs for the continuous semen parameter values, 5-year conception rates and time-to-conception consistently plateaued at higher values of sperm concentration, total sperm count, progressive motility, and TPMC compared to the WHO reference levels and our calculated thresholds. For TPMC, values up to 100-150 million were still associated with a better conception rate and time-to-conception in the visual assessment of the curves. There was limited information on female partners and potential for inaccuracies in capturing less severe female infertility diagnoses. Also we lacked details on assisted pregnancies achieved outside of our healthcare network (with possible miscoding as 'natural conception' in our cohort). We only used the initial SA and sperm morphology, another potentially important parameter, was not included in the analyses. We had no information on continuity of pregnancy attempts/intention, which could affect the time-to-conception data. Finally, most couples had been attempting conception for >12 months prior to initiating fertility treatment, so it is likely that we are underestimating time to conception. Importantly, our data might lack the generalizability to other populations. Our results suggest that a TPMC threshold of 50 million sperm provided the best predictive power to estimate earlier time-to-conception in couples evaluated for male factor infertility. Higher values of sperm count, concentration and progressive motility beyond the WHO references were still associated with better conception rates and time-to-conception. This provides an opportunity to optimize semen parameters in those with semen values that are low but not abnormal according to the WHO reference values. These data can be used to better inform patients regarding their chances of conception per year when SA results are used for patient counseling. None. N/A.

Keihani S ，Verrilli LE ，Zhang C ，Presson AP ，Hanson HA ，Pastuszak AW ，Johnstone EB ，Hotaling JM ... -  《-》

Body mass index in relation to semen quality and reproductive hormones in New Zealand men: a cross-sectional study in fertility clinics.

Macdonald AA ，Stewart AW ，Farquhar CM 《-》

Risk of childhood mortality in family members of men with poor semen quality.

What is the familial childhood mortality in first-degree (FDR) and second-degree relatives (SDR) of patients undergoing semen analysis (SA)? The relationship between infertility and congenital malformations (CM) in offspring is complex, with an increased risk of death due to CM in FDR, but not SDR, of men with lower semen parameters. Semen quality is an established predictor of men's somatic health. We can gain a better understanding of possible genetic or environmental determinants of the infertility phenotype by exploring familial aggregation of childhood mortality in relatives of men with poor semen quality. Retrospective cohort study from the Subfertility, Health and Assisted Reproduction study (cohort compiled 1996-2011) linked with patient/familial information from the Utah Population Database (UPDB). Index cases included a clinic-referred sample of 12 889 men who underwent SA and had adequate familial and follow-up data in the UPDB. Parameters of semen quality included: semen concentration, sperm count, motility, total motile count, sperm head morphology, sperm tail morphology and vitality. SA data were collected from two tertiary medical center andrology laboratories that have captured ~90% of all SA performed in Utah since 2004. Age- and sex-matched fertile controls were selected to create the comparison group for determining risk of childhood death (to age 20 years) in family members. A total of 79 750 siblings and 160 016 aunts/uncles were used to investigate the familial aggregation of childhood mortality. The main outcome was childhood mortality in FDR and SDR of men with SA and their matched controls. All-cause and cause-specific Cox proportional hazard models were used to test the association between semen quality and childhood mortality in family members. Cause-specific models were considered for cancer and CM. In the cohort of men with SA, there were 406 (1.0%) deaths in FDR and 772 (1.1%) deaths in SDR due to any cause. There was no significant difference in the risk of all-cause childhood mortality between the relatives of men with SA and the fertile control group [hazard ratio (HR)Female = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.88, 1.32; HRMale = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.75, 1.04]. We found no association between semen quality and risk for childhood cancer mortality in FDR or SDR (HRFDR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.62, 1.54; HRSDR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.83, 1.50). The FDR of men with SA and fertile controls were followed on average for 19.71 and 19.73 years, respectively. During this period of follow-up, FDR of men with SA had an unadjusted 40% relative risk of increased CM-related death. After stratifying by semen parameters and adjusting for birth year, we found FDR of men with worse semen quality, and notably azoospermic men (HR = 2.69, 95% CI = 1.24,5.84), were at higher risk of CM-related death. A large proportion of men with SA in the study had normal semen parameters. It is important to note that these men themselves may not be subfertile, but they were subfertile at the couple level (i.e. the female partner may be infertile). In addition, care is needed when interpreting our results, as we do not have semen measures on our sample of fertile men. Second, we were unable to include potential confounders such as medical comorbidities, smoking status, or environmental exposures. Third, men with SA were seen at the University of Utah or Intermountain Health Care clinics for a fertility evaluation thereby suggesting a more select population. Fourth, we chose to categorize morphology into equally distributed quartiles as a response to the fact that the World Health Organization threshold for normal motility changed multiple times during our study period. Lastly, we do not know the proportion of female partners with diagnosed infertility. We chose not to subcategorize each infertile male by infertile diagnosis because our goal was to understand how semen parameters influenced familial childhood mortality. We are not the first study to show a relationship between fertility and CMs. Children conceived through ART may be at higher risk of birth defects, however it is not known if the relationship is causal or if there is some underlying factor linking infertility and birth outcomes. This study provides further evidence that the increased risk of congenital birth defects may not be due to the ART, but rather genetic or environmental factors that link the two outcomes. We encourage further research in order to confirm a relationship between semen quality and increased risk for CM. This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health - National Institute of Aging [Grant numbers 1R21AG036938-01, 2R01 AG022095 and 1K12HD085852-01]. Authors have no competing interests to disclose. Not applicable.

Hanson HA ，Mayer EN ，Anderson RE ，Aston KI ，Carrell DT ，Berger J ，Lowrance WT ，Smith KR ，Hotaling JM ... -  《-》