• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Comparison of standard spermiogram evaluation with computer-aided sperm

S. Doubravská, J. Diblík, J. Ichová, Š. Vilímová, M. Macek Sr.

Status neindexováno Jazyk angličtina Země Česko

Typ dokumentu abstrakty

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc07517657

The aim of this study was a comparison of sperm concentration and motility (percentage of WHO A+B group) by standard spermiogram evaluation with computer-aided sperm analysis (CASA) for testing of their possible clinical impact. Methods: We have analyzed 105 ejaculate samples. The standard spermiogram evaluation was performed by bright field microscopy in the Makler chamber without heated stage. CASA was done with negative phase contrast in the Makler chamber with stage heated at 37 °C using the medeaLAB CASA software (MTG Medical Technology Vertriebs GmbH) with analog camera. Differences between both methods were evaluated by MS Excel software. Results: Average value of sperm concentration was 68 mil./ml by standard counting and 87,7 mil./ml by CASA. Median value of sperm concentration was 57 mil./ml by standard counting and 71,5 mil./ml by CASA. Average difference between the concentrations by the two methods was 46 mil./ml. Median difference between the concentrations by the two methods was 33,5 mil./ml. Correlation coefficient between the results of the two methods was 0,44. Average value of sperm motility was 50,9% by standard counting and 50,9% by CASA. Median value of sperm motility was 50% by standard counting and 50% by CASA. Average difference between the motility percentages by the two methods was 15,2%, median difference was 12,1%. The correlation coefficient between the results of the two methods was 0,71. Conclusion: The differences can be explained by difficulty of detection of moving sperm and sperm crossing of the chamber fields borders by human eye, by rather low frequency/resolution and higher sensitivity to focusing and lighting irregularities of the camera, by negative phase contrast and microscope stage heating used for CASA. Computer-aided sperm analysis (CASA) offers more objective sperm evaluation than analysis by human eye.

1. mezinárodní andrologický kongres v České republice, zámek Štiřín, 23.-25.2.2006

000      
00000naa 2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc07517657
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20111210130253.0
008      
090216s2006 xr e eng||
009      
PC
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $c ABA008 $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xr
100    1_
$a Doubravská, S. $7 _AN028098
245    10
$a Comparison of standard spermiogram evaluation with computer-aided sperm / $c S. Doubravská, J. Diblík, J. Ichová, Š. Vilímová, M. Macek Sr.
314    __
$a Center of Reproductive Genetics, Institute of Biology and Medical Genetics, Charles University - 2nd School of Medicine, University Hospital Motol, Prague
500    __
$a 1. mezinárodní andrologický kongres v České republice, zámek Štiřín, 23.-25.2.2006
520    9_
$a The aim of this study was a comparison of sperm concentration and motility (percentage of WHO A+B group) by standard spermiogram evaluation with computer-aided sperm analysis (CASA) for testing of their possible clinical impact. Methods: We have analyzed 105 ejaculate samples. The standard spermiogram evaluation was performed by bright field microscopy in the Makler chamber without heated stage. CASA was done with negative phase contrast in the Makler chamber with stage heated at 37 °C using the medeaLAB CASA software (MTG Medical Technology Vertriebs GmbH) with analog camera. Differences between both methods were evaluated by MS Excel software. Results: Average value of sperm concentration was 68 mil./ml by standard counting and 87,7 mil./ml by CASA. Median value of sperm concentration was 57 mil./ml by standard counting and 71,5 mil./ml by CASA. Average difference between the concentrations by the two methods was 46 mil./ml. Median difference between the concentrations by the two methods was 33,5 mil./ml. Correlation coefficient between the results of the two methods was 0,44. Average value of sperm motility was 50,9% by standard counting and 50,9% by CASA. Median value of sperm motility was 50% by standard counting and 50% by CASA. Average difference between the motility percentages by the two methods was 15,2%, median difference was 12,1%. The correlation coefficient between the results of the two methods was 0,71. Conclusion: The differences can be explained by difficulty of detection of moving sperm and sperm crossing of the chamber fields borders by human eye, by rather low frequency/resolution and higher sensitivity to focusing and lighting irregularities of the camera, by negative phase contrast and microscope stage heating used for CASA. Computer-aided sperm analysis (CASA) offers more objective sperm evaluation than analysis by human eye.
590    __
$a NEINDEXOVÁNO
655    _2
$a abstrakty $7 D020504
700    1_
$a Diblík, Jan $7 xx0066069
700    1_
$a Ichová, J. $7 _AN028104
700    1_
$a Vilímová, Šárka $7 xx0104735
700    1_
$a Macek, Milan, $d 1932- $7 nlk20020122179
773    0_
$w MED00183118 $t 1. mezinárodní andrologický kongres v České republice $g (2006), s. 80 $x 1802-4793
910    __
$a ABA008 $b x $y 9
990    __
$a 20090212122221 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20090216124542 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 635468 $s 488190
BAS    __
$a 6 $a
BMC    __
$a 2006 $d 80 $i 1802-4793 $m 1. mezinárodní andrologický kongres v České republice $x MED00183118
LZP    __
$a 2009-07/mkbi

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...