The evaluation of morphological characteristics of human spermatozoa according to stricter criteria

The evaluation of the morphology of human spermatozoa varies widely between and sometimes even within laboratories. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the method that has been developed in our laboratory and which resulted in the use of stricter criteria for the evaluation of sperm m...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Human reproduction (Oxford) 1990-07, Vol.5 (5), p.586-592
Main Authors: Menkveld, Roelof, Stander, Frik S.H., Kotze, Theunis J.vW, Kruger, Thinus F., Zyl, Johannes A.van
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Cytodiagnosis - standards
Cytodiagnosis - statistics & numerical data
Humans
Infertility, Male - pathology
Male
normal spermatozoa
Quality Control
semen analysis
Specimen Handling
sperm morphology evaluation
Spermatozoa - pathology
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The evaluation of the morphology of human spermatozoa varies widely between and sometimes even within laboratories. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the method that has been developed in our laboratory and which resulted in the use of stricter criteria for the evaluation of sperm morphology is a practical, reliable and repeatable method and to establish the within and between observer variations. The criteria used for a ‘normal’ spermatozoon are based on the appearance of spermatozoa found in the mucus of the upper endocervical canal. The results of the morphological evaluations of 26 samples by four observers were statistically analysed by various methods. The method of Barnett showed a high degree of relative accuracy between observers with error variances of between 2.89 and 19.67 as well as high Spearman rank correlation coefficients of between 0.8675 and 0.6537 (P < 0.0003). The Spearman correlation coefficient for 15 duplicate evaluations by one observer was 0.9650 (P < 0.0001) while the coefficients of variation for repeated evaluations of single samples were also within acceptable limits. Based on these results, the method described in this article allows comparable and reliable results between and within observers to be obtained. From this and other studies it can be concluded that the method also has a good prognostic value for the prediction of expected IVF fertilization, the hamster test and hemizona assay.
ISSN:0268-1161
1460-2350
DOI:10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137150