| Title |
The effect of swim-up and gradient sperm preparation techniques on deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) fragmentation in subfertile patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10815-018-1163-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yuksel Oguz, Ismail Guler, Ahmet Erdem, Mehmet Firat Mutlu, Seyhan Gumuslu, Mesut Oktem, Nuray Bozkurt, Mehmet Erdem |
| Abstract |
To compare the effect of two different sperm preparation techniques, including swim-up and gradient methods on sperm deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) fragmentation status of semen samples from unexplained and mild male factor subfertile patients undergoing intrauterine insemination (IUI). A prospective randomized study was conducted in 65 subfertile patients, including 34 unexplained and 31 male factor infertility to compare basal and post-procedure DNA fragmentation rates in swim-up and gradient techniques. Sperm DNA fragmentation rates were evaluated by a sperm chromatin dispersion (SCD) test in two portions of each sample of semen that was prepared with either swim-up or gradient techniques. Sperm motility and morphology were also assessed based on WHO 2010 criteria. Swim-up but not gradient method yielded a statistically significant reduction in the DNA fragmented sperm rate after preparation as compared to basal rates, in the semen samples of both unexplained (41.85 ± 22.04 vs. 28.58 ± 21.93, p < 0.001 for swim-up; and 41.85 ± 22.04 vs. 38.79 ± 22.30, p = 0.160 for gradient) and mild male factor (46.61 ± 19.38 vs. 30.32 ± 18.20, p < 0.001 for swim-up and 46.61 ± 19.38 vs. 44.03 ± 20.87, p = 0.470 for gradient) subgroups. Swim-up method significantly reduces sperm DNA fragmentation rates and may have some prognostic value on intrauterine insemination in patients with decreased sperm DNA integrity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 20% |
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 89 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 13% |
| Researcher | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 32 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 28% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 19 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 April 2018.
All research outputs
#7,372,493
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
#418
of 1,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,434
of 335,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
#6
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,697 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,166 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.