Search

It may be very difficult to diagnose male infertility by analyzing the number, movement, or shape of sperm. In a study of 765 infertile men and 696 fertile men, sperm characteristics varied considerably and there was a substantial overlap in sperm quality between both groups.

A response by S. H. Swan and colleagues to a letter to the editor about their article "Semen Quality of Fertile US Males in Relation to Their Mother's Beef Consumption During Pregnancy," published in the 2007 issue is presented.

Rigorously standardized laboratory protocols and strict quality control (QC) are essential for meaningful comparisons between semen quality data from multiple sites. We describe our experience with the Study for Future Families (SFF), a multicenter study of semen quality in the United States. Detailed protocols were developed, and technicians from each study site attended a training session at the central laboratory. Technicians received blinded replicates from diluted semen specimens for counting by MicroCell and hemacytometer. Sperm motility was assessed using videotaped recordings for simple percent motility and categorical assessment of individual sperm progression as recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO). The mean intertechnician coefficient of variation for individual specimens was 12.6% for MicroCell counts, 15.2% for hemacytometer counts, and 10.5% for percent motility. Intratechnician coefficients of variation averaged 10.3% for MicroCell counts, 12.5% for hemacytometer counts, and 5.2% for percent motility. The average percent differences between the technicians' values and the central standard for individual specimens were 13.5%, 16.6%, and 11.9% for MicroCell counts, hemacytometer counts, and simple percent motility, respectively. We achieved our goal of maintaining mean intratechnician coefficients of variation and mean percent differences from the standard values of 15% or less for measurements of simple percent motility and sperm concentration by MicroCell. Standardization using the Improved Neubauer hemacytometer chamber proved more difficult. We were not successful in standardizing a method for categorical assessment of individual sperm progression.

Semen evaluation methodology is complex and difficult to standardize. Rigorously standardized laboratory protocols and strict quality control (QC) are essential for meaningful comparison of data from multiple sites. We describe the methods used for determination of semen volume, sperm concentration, and percent sperm motility in the Study for Future Families, a multicenter study of semen quality in the United States. Each of these 3 semen parameters was assessed using 2 techniques, which provided the opportunity to compare precision and assess suitability for multicenter studies. Detailed protocols were used, and technicians were centrally trained. A total of 509 semen evaluations were performed. Semen volume measured by weight was greater (P <.0001) than that determined by pipetting (3.7 +/- 1.6 mL vs 3.2 +/- 1.6 mL). Sperm concentration determined using hemacytometer chambers was consistently higher (P <.001) than that using disposable MicroCell chambers (81.0 x 10(6)/mL vs 65.9 x 10(6)/mL). Precision was slightly greater for the MicroCell chamber. The percentage of motile sperm was assessed by a simple counting technique as well as by the World Health Organization categorical method that assigns individual motile sperm to "a," "b," and "c" categories on the basis of progression. When these 3 categories were collapsed, the methods provided values that were not statistically different (P >.05), although the collapsed values tended to be higher (58.1% vs 51.6%) and less precise (CV 7.7% vs 4.1%) for the categorical method than for motility determined using the simple method. The data obtained in this study demonstrate the critical need for rigorous standardization of protocols and techniques for multicenter studies.