|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sperm
function tests
after vasovasostomy
Ren-Qian
WEN, Mei-Yi LIE, Pei-ling TIAN, Ning YANG, Yan-Jia JIANG, Ai-Ping CHEN Family
Planning Research Institute of Guangdong, Guangzhou 510600, China Asian J Androl 2000 Jun; 2: 111-114 Keywords:
|
|
Fertile
controls |
Group
A |
Group
B |
Group
C |
HOST
(%): |
81.09.4 |
56.915.5c |
56.715.3c |
66.910.9ce |
AO
(%): |
61.114.7 |
57.811.5 |
65.18.7 |
56.413 |
Triple-stain: |
23.913.0 |
15.86.3b |
2 |
21.86.4e |
CMPT
(%): |
||||
good: |
50.0
(17/34) |
29.7
(11/37) |
25.0
(4/16) |
26.1
(6/23) |
fair: |
41.2
(14/34) |
21.6
(8/37) |
50.0
(8/16) |
34.8
(8/23) |
poor: |
8.8
(3/34) |
37.8
(14/37)c |
12.5
(2/16) |
30.4
(7/23)b |
negative: |
0
(0/34) |
10.8
(4/37)b |
12.5
(2/16)b |
8.7
(2/23) |
After
vasectomy reversal the reasons of lower pregnancy rate are antisperm antibodies[8,12,15],
abnormal sperm morphology[10], epididymal dysfunctions[12],
etc. Although
WHO does not recommend HOST as a sperm function test[2], HOST
can give additional information on the integrity and compliance of the
sperm tail membrane. In this study we indicated that after vasectomy reversal
the percentage of HOST in the semen was significantly lower than that
of the controls. The result
is similar to those of spermatozoa in proximal vas deferens (mature spermatozoa
before ejaculation) of vasectomized men[16]. It was
suggested that after vasectomy, the cell membrane integrity from
spermatozoa stored in epididymis and proximal vas deferens was decreased[7]
and this lower level remained for one year after vasectomy reversal. It
was gradually recovered one year after vasovasostomy. Sperm movement is
dependent largely on the integrity of sperm tail membrane, which is very
important for the natural fertilizing process.
The
AO fluorescence has been recommended as a new functional test for male
fertility. It
was shown that the percentage of normal sperm with green fluorescence
at the head was lower in the infertile than the fertile men[17].
In present study we did not find significant difference within the vasovasostomy
groups and between these groups and the normal controls. The authors believe
that the genetic material, which AO is said to evaluate, are not affected
by vasectomy or vasovasostomy and it is apparently not the cause of lowered
pregnancy rate after vasectomy reversal. Our results showed that only
in Group A the percentage of normal acrosome reaction was significantly
lower than that of the normal controls, whereas those in Group B and Group
C were not, suggesting that within 6 months after vasovasostomy the acrosome
reaction was lower and was recovered 6 months after vasectomy reversal.
Pampiglions et al[18] indicated that an acrosomal response
of <31.3% (using triple-stain technique after stimulation by the calcium
ionophore A23187) was a predictive value for spermatozoa that failed to
fertilize. In this study A23187 was not used and the result of the control
men was only 23.9%. Both studies indicated that the triple-stain technique
was a useful test for evaluating sperm fertilizing
ability.
The
CMPT capillary tube test was recommended by WHO[1] as one of
the routine sperm function method. With CMPT, good and fair were
considered as normal result, and
poor and negative, abnormal. In the present study no significant difference
was found between vasovasostomy groups and the normal controls. It is
suggested that after vasectomy and vasovasostomy the ability of sperm
to penetrate cervical
mucus was reserved. However, the percentage of poor in Groups A and
C, and the percentage of negative in Groups A and B were significantly
higher than that of the normal controls. Although after vasectomy reversal,
the good and fair were within the normal level, there was definitely
a decreasing tendency. It
was thus indicated that in evaluating the result of CMPT after vasectomy reversal,
not only the normal results (good and fair) but also the abnormal
results (poor and negative), shuld be considered.
5
Acknowledgements
References
[1]
WHO. WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination of Human Semen and Sperm-Cervical
Mucus Interaction. 2nd
ed. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press;
1987.
[2] WHO. WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination of Human Semen and
Sperm-Cervical Mucus Interaction.
3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1992.
[3] Tablot P, Chacon RA. Triple-stain technique for evaluating normal
acrosome reactions of human sperm. J Exp Zool 1981; 215: 201-8.
[4] Tejada RI, Mitchell JC, Norman A, Marik JJ, Friedman S. A test for
the practical
evaluation of male fertility by acridine orange (AO) fluorescence. Fertil
Steril 1984; 42: 87-91.
[5] Feng HM, Wen RQ, Li SQ, Wang CX, Wang QH, Li QK, et al. Protein in
fluid from the proximal vas deferens of normal fertile and vasectomized
men. Int
J Androl 1995; 18: 63-6.
[6] Silber SJ. Vasectomy and vasectomy reversal. Fertil Steril
1978; 29: 125-40.
[7] Wen RQ, Li SQ, Wang CX, Wang QH, Li QK, Feng HM, et al. Analysis of
spermatozoa from the proximal vas deferens of vasectomized men. Int J
Androl 1994;
17: 181-5.
[8] Meinertz H, Linnet L, Andersen PF, Hajort T. Antisperm antibodies
and fertility after vasovasostomy: a follow up study of 216 men. Fertil
Steril
1990; 54: 315-21.
[9] Urry RL. A fifteen-year study of alterations in semen quality occurring
after vasectomy reversal. Fertil Steril 1990; 53: 341-5.
[10] Pelfrey RJ, Overstreet JW, Lewis EL. Abnormalities
of
sperm morphology in case of persistent infertility after vasectomy
reversal.
Fertil Steril 1982;
38: 112-6.
[11] Wen RQ, LI SQ, Wang CX, Wang QH,
Liu MY. An investigation of semen parameters
after vasectomy reversal. Chin J Family Planning 1998; 9: 392-9.
[12] Sharlip ID. What is the best pregnancy rate that may be expected
from vasectomy reversal?
J Urol 1993; 149: 1467-71.
[13] Hargreave TB. Towards reversible vasectomy. Int J Androl 1992; 15:
455-9.
[14] Fox M. Vasectomy reversal-microsurgery for best results. Br J Urol
1994; 73: 449-53.
[15] Wen RQ, LI SQ, Wang CX, Wang QK,
Liu MY. Antisperm antibodies on the surface of spermatozoa before
ejaculation from vasectomized men. Reprod Contracep
(English Edition) 1997; 8: 27-31.
[16] Wen RQ, Li SQ, Wang CX, Wang QK, Li QK, Feng HM, et al. Analysis
of spermatozoa from the proximal vas deferens of fertile men. Int
J Androl 1993;
16: 87-91.
[17] Zhuan GN, Huang YF, Yang JH, Wu JG. A simple method for evaluating
the ability of sperm fertility: acridine orange (AO) fluorescence stain.
Chin J
Androl 1989; 3: 241-2.
[18] Pampiglions JS, Tan SL, Campbell S. The use of the stimulated acrosome
reaction test as a test of fertilizing ability in human spermatozoa.
Correspondence
to Dr
Ren-Qian Wen, Family Planning Research Institute of
Guangdong, 17 Mei Dong Road, Dongshan District, Guangzhou 510600,
China
Fax: +86-20-8777
7331
E-mail wenrq@163.net
Received
2000-03-13
Accepted 2000-05-09