-
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
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