Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Does combining magnetic-activated cell sorting with density gradient or swim-up improve sperm selection?
Cakar, Zeynep; Cetinkaya, Burcu; Aras, Duru; Koca, Betül; Ozkavukcu, Sinan; Kaplanoglu, Iskender; Can, Alp; Cinar, Ozgur.
Afiliação
  • Cakar Z; Department of Histology and Embryology, Laboratories for Stem Cells and Reproductive Biology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Sihhiye, 06100, Ankara, Turkey.
  • Cetinkaya B; Department of Histology and Embryology, Laboratories for Stem Cells and Reproductive Biology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Sihhiye, 06100, Ankara, Turkey.
  • Aras D; Department of Histology and Embryology, Laboratories for Stem Cells and Reproductive Biology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Sihhiye, 06100, Ankara, Turkey.
  • Koca B; Department of Histology and Embryology, Laboratories for Stem Cells and Reproductive Biology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Sihhiye, 06100, Ankara, Turkey.
  • Ozkavukcu S; Ankara University School of Medicine, Center for Assisted Reproduction, Cebeci, Ankara, Turkey.
  • Kaplanoglu I; Etlik Zubeyde Hanim Women's Health Teaching and Research Hospital, Center for Assisted Reproduction, Etlik, Ankara, Turkey.
  • Can A; Department of Histology and Embryology, Laboratories for Stem Cells and Reproductive Biology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Sihhiye, 06100, Ankara, Turkey.
  • Cinar O; Department of Histology and Embryology, Laboratories for Stem Cells and Reproductive Biology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Sihhiye, 06100, Ankara, Turkey. ocinar@ankara.edu.tr.
J Assist Reprod Genet ; 33(8): 1059-65, 2016 Aug.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27233651
PURPOSE: The present study aimed to evaluate whether combining the magnetic-activated cell sorting (MACS) with density-gradient (DG) or swim-up (SU) sperm separation techniques can improve sperm selection to obtain higher quality spermatozoa. METHODS: Two commonly used sperm selection techniques, SU and DG, were compared to MACS combined with either SU or DG. Spermatozoa obtained from normozoospermic (n = 10) and oligozoospermic (n = 10) cases were grouped as SU, DG, SU+MACS, and DG+MACS followed by the analysis of sperm morphology, motility, DNA integrity, and the levels of Izumo-1 and PLCZ proteins. RESULTS: Although spermatozoa obtained by SU or DG when combined with MACS have improved aspects when compared to SU or DG alone, results did not reach a statistically significant level. Moreover, separation with MACS caused a significant loss in the numbers of total and rapid progressive spermatozoa. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the cost/benefit ratio, MACS application together with traditional techniques may only be preferred in certain cases having higher concentrations of spermatozoa, but it does not seem to be an ideal and practical sperm selection technique for routine use.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Motilidade dos Espermatozoides / Espermatozoides / Centrifugação com Gradiente de Concentração / Citometria de Fluxo Limite: Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Motilidade dos Espermatozoides / Espermatozoides / Centrifugação com Gradiente de Concentração / Citometria de Fluxo Limite: Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article