Timing of semen cryopreservation: before or after processing?

Objective: Seminal cryopreservation causes significant damage to the sperm; therefore, different methods of cryopreservation have been studied. The aim of the study was to compare the effects of density gradient processing and washing/centrifugation with seminal plasma removal for cryopreservation in semen parameters. Methods: Seminal samples of 26 normozoospermic patients were divided into 3 parts: with seminal plasma; after washing/centrifugation; and after selection through density gradient. The samples were cryopreserved for at least two weeks. Motility, sperm count, morphology and viability were evaluated before cryopreservation and after thawing. Results: Density gradient processing selected motile and viable sperm with normal morphology in fresh samples (p<0.05). Cryopreservation negatively affected all sperm parameters regardless of the processing performed, and even if the sperm recovery was lower in the density gradient after the thawing, progressive motility, total motility, viability and morphology remained higher (p<0.05). Conclusion: Cryopreservation significantly compromises sperm parameters (motility, morphology, viability). In normozoospermic patients, the density gradients select better quality spermatozoa compared to other processing methods; this benefit was kept after thawing.

Semen Analysis of Total Motile Sperm Count Based on the 1999 and 2010 WHO Criteria.

OBJECTIVE: Approximately 15% of the couples suffer from infertility. Half of the cases of infertility are due to male factors. Several sperm function tests have been proposed to evaluate male fertility, but sperm analysis is still the first and most important diagnostic test for male infertility. The prognostic value of semen characteristics such as concentration, morphology and motility markers are often confused with male infertility. Evaluation of seminal parameters and classification for normality remains a frequent topic of discussion. METHODS: This study evaluated 477 semen samples from men undergoing investigation or infertility treatment between 2011 and 2015. RESULTS: The spermograms of 401 patients were deemed abnormal based on the 1999 World Health Organization (WHO) criteria; the number changed to 223 when the spermograms were assessed based on the 2010 WHO criteria and to 200 when Total Motile Sperm Count (TMSC) was used as the criterion. Sperm morphology was the item in the criteria that most significantly changed spermogram classification. Normality parameters became less rigid from 1999 to 2010, thereby significantly changing the proportion of individuals no longer described as infertile/subfertile. CONCLUSIONS: The classification based on TMSC could not differentiate between fertile and infertile subjects for not taking sperm morphology into account. Nevertheless, it may be helpful in cases where intrauterine insemination is indicated.