Limits...
Sperm DNA fragmentation, recurrent implantation failure and recurrent miscarriage.

Coughlan C, Clarke H, Cutting R, Saxton J, Waite S, Ledger W, Li T, Pacey AA - Asian J. Androl. (2015 Jul-Aug)

Bottom Line: There were no significant differences in the age of either partner or sperm concentration, motility or morphology between three groups.Moreover, there were no obvious differences in sperm DNA fragmentation measured by either test.However, whilst on average sperm DNA fragmentation in all groups was statistically lower in prepared sperm when measured by the SCD test, this was not seen with the results from the TUNEL assay.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Human Metabolism, Academic Unit of Reproductive and Developmental Medicine, University of Sheffield, Level 4, The Jessop Wing, Tree Root Walk, Sheffield, S10 2SF, United Kingdom.

ABSTRACT
Evidence is increasing that the integrity of sperm DNA may also be related to implantation failure and recurrent miscarriage (RM). To investigate this, the sperm DNA fragmentation in partners of 35 women with recurrent implantation failure (RIF) following in vitro fertilization, 16 women diagnosed with RM and seven recent fathers (control) were examined. Sperm were examined pre- and post-density centrifugation by the sperm chromatin dispersion (SCD) test and the terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) assay. There were no significant differences in the age of either partner or sperm concentration, motility or morphology between three groups. Moreover, there were no obvious differences in sperm DNA fragmentation measured by either test. However, whilst on average sperm DNA fragmentation in all groups was statistically lower in prepared sperm when measured by the SCD test, this was not seen with the results from the TUNEL assay. These results do not support the hypothesis that sperm DNA fragmentation is an important cause of RIF or RM, or that sperm DNA integrity testing has value in such patients. It also highlights significant differences between test methodologies and sperm preparation methods in interpreting the data from sperm DNA fragmentation tests.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Percentage of sperm with DNA fragmentation in male partners of women with recurrent implantation failure (a and b), recurrent miscarriage (c and d), and in a group of recent fathers (control) (e and f) as measured by sperm chromatin disruption test (left hand graphs) and terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labelling (right hand graphs). All measurements were made on sperm in semen and immediately following density gradient centrifugation. Values show mean ± s.e.m.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4492063&req=5

Figure 1: Percentage of sperm with DNA fragmentation in male partners of women with recurrent implantation failure (a and b), recurrent miscarriage (c and d), and in a group of recent fathers (control) (e and f) as measured by sperm chromatin disruption test (left hand graphs) and terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labelling (right hand graphs). All measurements were made on sperm in semen and immediately following density gradient centrifugation. Values show mean ± s.e.m.

Mentions: Figure 1 shows the DNA fragmentation measured by the SCD test and TUNEL assay in each of the three groups (RIF, RM and control) of sperm in semen and sperm recovered following density gradient centrifugation (DCG). Briefly, across semen samples, although the mean values obtained for percentage of sperm with fragmented DNA were numerically higher with the SCD test compared with the results of the TUNEL assay, there was only a statistical difference (P < 0.05) between the results obtained on sperm from the recent fathers (cf. Figure 1e and 1f). About sperm obtained following DCG, there were no statistical differences in the percentage of sperm with DNA damage between the three patient groups and the two test methods.


Sperm DNA fragmentation, recurrent implantation failure and recurrent miscarriage.

Coughlan C, Clarke H, Cutting R, Saxton J, Waite S, Ledger W, Li T, Pacey AA - Asian J. Androl. (2015 Jul-Aug)

Percentage of sperm with DNA fragmentation in male partners of women with recurrent implantation failure (a and b), recurrent miscarriage (c and d), and in a group of recent fathers (control) (e and f) as measured by sperm chromatin disruption test (left hand graphs) and terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labelling (right hand graphs). All measurements were made on sperm in semen and immediately following density gradient centrifugation. Values show mean ± s.e.m.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4492063&req=5

Figure 1: Percentage of sperm with DNA fragmentation in male partners of women with recurrent implantation failure (a and b), recurrent miscarriage (c and d), and in a group of recent fathers (control) (e and f) as measured by sperm chromatin disruption test (left hand graphs) and terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labelling (right hand graphs). All measurements were made on sperm in semen and immediately following density gradient centrifugation. Values show mean ± s.e.m.
Mentions: Figure 1 shows the DNA fragmentation measured by the SCD test and TUNEL assay in each of the three groups (RIF, RM and control) of sperm in semen and sperm recovered following density gradient centrifugation (DCG). Briefly, across semen samples, although the mean values obtained for percentage of sperm with fragmented DNA were numerically higher with the SCD test compared with the results of the TUNEL assay, there was only a statistical difference (P < 0.05) between the results obtained on sperm from the recent fathers (cf. Figure 1e and 1f). About sperm obtained following DCG, there were no statistical differences in the percentage of sperm with DNA damage between the three patient groups and the two test methods.

Bottom Line: There were no significant differences in the age of either partner or sperm concentration, motility or morphology between three groups.Moreover, there were no obvious differences in sperm DNA fragmentation measured by either test.However, whilst on average sperm DNA fragmentation in all groups was statistically lower in prepared sperm when measured by the SCD test, this was not seen with the results from the TUNEL assay.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Human Metabolism, Academic Unit of Reproductive and Developmental Medicine, University of Sheffield, Level 4, The Jessop Wing, Tree Root Walk, Sheffield, S10 2SF, United Kingdom.

ABSTRACT
Evidence is increasing that the integrity of sperm DNA may also be related to implantation failure and recurrent miscarriage (RM). To investigate this, the sperm DNA fragmentation in partners of 35 women with recurrent implantation failure (RIF) following in vitro fertilization, 16 women diagnosed with RM and seven recent fathers (control) were examined. Sperm were examined pre- and post-density centrifugation by the sperm chromatin dispersion (SCD) test and the terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) assay. There were no significant differences in the age of either partner or sperm concentration, motility or morphology between three groups. Moreover, there were no obvious differences in sperm DNA fragmentation measured by either test. However, whilst on average sperm DNA fragmentation in all groups was statistically lower in prepared sperm when measured by the SCD test, this was not seen with the results from the TUNEL assay. These results do not support the hypothesis that sperm DNA fragmentation is an important cause of RIF or RM, or that sperm DNA integrity testing has value in such patients. It also highlights significant differences between test methodologies and sperm preparation methods in interpreting the data from sperm DNA fragmentation tests.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus