Sofikitis, N. V., & Miyagawa, I. (1993). Endocrinological, biophysical, and biochemical parameters of semen collected via masturbation versus sexual intercourse. Journal of andrology, 14(5), 366-73.
Sofikitis NV, Miyagawa I. Endocrinological, biophysical, and biochemical parameters of semen collected via masturbation versus sexual intercourse. Journal of andrology. 1993;14(5):366-73.
Sofikitis, N. V., and I. Miyagawa. "Endocrinological, biophysical, and biochemical parameters of semen collected via masturbation versus sexual intercourse." Journal of andrology, vol. 14, no. 5, 1993, pp. 366-73.
For EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley:
License
No open license is recorded for this paper. Reuse terms are set by the publisher.
Abstract
In clinical programs of assisted reproduction involving infertile males, it is essential to obtain semen of maximum quality. To evaluate ways of achieving this objective, and to assess the fertilizing capacity of the sperm, six semen samples were collected from each of 38 infertile men via masturbation. Six more samples were then collected from each man at sexual intercourse using a semen collection device (SCD). We confirmed that the volume of seminal plasma, total sperm count, sperm motility, and percentage of morphologically normal spermatozoa were significantly higher in samples collected at intercourse than masturbation, as reported previously. In addition, the markers of the secretory function of the prostate and the outcome of sperm function tests (hypoosmotic swelling test, acrosin assay, and sperm penetration assay) were significantly higher for the samples collected at intercourse. There were no significant differences in markers of the secretory function of the seminal vesicles and epididymis between the samples. The improved spermatozoal parameters in the samples collected at intercourse may reflect a higher prostatic secretory function at that time. There were no significant differences in the serum concentrations of gonadotropins, or in the serum or seminal plasma concentrations of testosterone, before or after masturbation or sexual intercourse. Therefore, the differences in prostatic secretory function and semen parameters may not be attributed to differences in hormonal levels. Semen collection during intercourse using an SCD appears to be the method of choice for selecting semen samples for artificial insemination.
The sperm function of fertile men (control), infertility patients (experimental), and men with varicocele were compared. The bioassays used were the follicular fluid-induced acrosome reaction, the binding to the zona pellucida, and the penetration of zona-free hamster oocytes. The percentage (mean +/- SEM) of reacted spermatozoa was 35 +/- 3 in the control, 22 +/- 1 in the experimental, and 22 +/- 3 in the varicocele. The minimum value of acrosome reaction in control men was 20%. The mean number of zona-bound spermatozoa was 250 +/- 30 in the control, 160 +/- 28 in the experimental, and 196 +/- 44 in the varicocele. The minimum number of zona bound spermatozoa in control men was 50. The mean number of hamster oocytes penetrated was 50 +/- 8 in the control, 19 +/- 3% in the experimental, and 10 +/- 3 in the varicocele. The minimum number of oocytes penetrated in control men was 6%. In the experimental group, 22 men had a normal sperm function, 58 had 1 or 2 bioassays below the minimum (relative dysfunction), and 10 had all bioassay below the minimum (abnormal sperm function). The results of these bioassays could help to reclassify the infertile men in several subgroups.
Wang N et al., 2022·Front Physiol·Free full text on PubMed Central
To establish a system for evaluation of semen quality in fertile men by factor analysis (FA). The FA method was used to analyze five sperm test indicators for fertile men (sperm pH, sperm motility, sperm progressive motility, semen density, and total sperm number) to determine the evaluation standard of semen quality. Pearson analysis was adopted for correlation testing. The comprehensive score formula for semen quality of normal fertile men was as follows: comprehensive score of semen quality = (0.38272 F(1) + 0.36359 F(2) + 0.20018 F (3))/94.699. Across the whole fertile population, semen quality was found to be correlated with abstinence period, age of first spermatorrhea, and frequency of intercourse. Smoking, drinking, and place of residence were correlated with semen quality in the high semen quality population. In the population with medium semen quality, only the abstinence period was associated with semen quality. It is feasible to evaluate the semen quality of fertile men using the FA method. The comprehensive indicators of semen volume, sperm motility, and semen pH can be used as evaluative measures. Across the whole fertile population, the abstinence period and age of first spermatorrhea were correlated with semen quality. In the high semen quality population, smoking and drinking were negatively correlated with semen quality, and participants living in rural areas had better semen quality.
Nedelcu S et al., 2024·Hum Reprod Open·Free full text on PubMed Central
Can semen parameters predict long-term health outcomes in men? There is a lack of evidence to suggest a higher risk of comorbidities in men with poor semen concentration. Male infertility has been long associated with a higher mortality risk and possibly higher chance of developing comorbidities but there has been less focus on semen analysis as a potential predictive factor. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and EBM databases from inception to December 2023. MESH term strategy: heading 1 ('OR', semen analysis, sperm count, sperm parameter*, male infertility, azoospermia, aspermia, oligospermia, teratozoospermia, asthenozoospermia) 'AND' heading 2 ('OR', morbidity, mortality, diabetes, cancer, cardiovascular, death, hypertension, stroke, long-term health). We included all studies that analyzed the risk of mortality and/or future development of comorbidities in men with at least one semen analysis. Case series and reviews were excluded. A narrative synthesis was done for all studies and meta-analysis where possible. Odds ratio (ORs) (95% CI, P-value) were calculated for all men with one suboptimal semen parameter and associated with the risk of a particular outcome. The risk of bias was assessed with QUADAS-2. MAIN Twenty-one studies were finally included. There was either a high or unclear risk of bias in all studies. The results only allowed for meta-analysis on categories of sperm concentration. We found a 2-fold increase in mortality risk in azoospermic men compared to oligospermic (OR 1.96, 95% CI: 1.29-2.96) and normozoospermic (OR 2.00, 95% CI: 1.23-3.25) groups, but not in oligospermic compared to normozoospermic (OR 1.04, 95% CI: 0.52-2.09). There was no difference in risk of cardiovascular disease in any of the sperm concentration groups (azoospermic-oligospermic OR 0.94, 95% CI: 0.74-1.20, azoospermic-normozoospermic OR 1.11, 95% CI: 0.71-1.75, and oligospermic-normozoospermic OR 1.12, 95% CI: 0.80-1.55). OR for diabetes in azoospermic men was higher only compared to oligospermic (OR 2.16, 95% CI: 1.55-3.01). The risk of all-site cancer was higher in azoospermic men compared to oligospermic (OR 2.16, 95% CI: 1.55-3.01) and normozoospermic (OR 2.18, 95% CI: 1.20-3.96). Only azoospermic men might be at higher risk of testicular cancer when compared to men with normal sperm concentration (OR 1.80, 95% CI: 1.12-2.89). LIMITATIONS Although our pooled analysis shows an increased risk of mortality and all-site cancer risk in azoospermic men, the results show a lack of evidence to suggest a higher risk of comorbidities in men with poor semen concentration. Given the limited available data, the nature of the studies, and the high risk of bias, the results should be interpreted with caution. There is not enough data to confirm the usability of semen analysis as a predictor of poor long-term health in men, especially within the general population. No funding was obtained for this study. A.M. has received funding from Merck Serono, Ferring, Gedeon Richter, Pharmasure, and Cook Medical to attend medical conferences; has been a participant in an advisory board for Ferring; and has given an invited lecture for a Merck Serono advisory board. S.N. has received funding for medical conference attendance from Ferring and Cook Medical. PROSPERO No. CRD42024507563.
Milardi D et al., 2012·International journal of endocrinology·Free full text on PubMed Central
Background. Infertility is both a clinical and a public problem, affecting the life of the couple, the healthcare services, and social environment. Standard semen analysis is the surrogate measure of male fertility in clinical practice. Objective. To provide information about the relationship between semen parameters and spontaneous conception. Methods. We evaluated retrospectively 453 pregnancies that occurred among 2935 infertile couples evaluated at an infertility clinic of a tertiary-care university hospital, between 2004 and 2009. Results. Normal semen analysis was present only in 158 patients; 295 subfertile patients showed alterations in at least one seminal parameter. A reduction in all seminal parameters was observed in 41 patients. Etiological causes of male infertility were identified in 314 patients. Conclusion. Our data highlights the possibility of a spontaneous conception with semen parameters below WHO reference values. Therefore, we support the importance of defining reference values on a population of fertile men. Finally, we analyzed the related ethical issues.
Male Fertility › Semen Analysis › Sperm Function Testing
PMID 8288490 8288490 Sofikitis et al. 1993, Sofikitis 1993
Cite this article
Sofikitis, N. V., & Miyagawa, I. (1993). Endocrinological, biophysical, and biochemical parameters of semen collected via masturbation versus sexual intercourse. Journal of andrology, 14(5), 366-73.
Sofikitis NV, Miyagawa I. Endocrinological, biophysical, and biochemical parameters of semen collected via masturbation versus sexual intercourse. Journal of andrology. 1993;14(5):366-73.
Sofikitis, N. V., and I. Miyagawa. "Endocrinological, biophysical, and biochemical parameters of semen collected via masturbation versus sexual intercourse." Journal of andrology, vol. 14, no. 5, 1993, pp. 366-73.