Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (26)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Aslam, I.
Right arrow Articles by Fishel, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Aslam, I.
Right arrow Articles by Fishel, S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol 13, 639-645, Copyright © 1998 by Oxford University Press


ARTICLES

Isolation, purification and assessment of viability of spermatogenic cells from testicular biopsies of azoospermic men

I Aslam, A Robins, K Dowell and S Fishel
CARE, The Park Hospital, Arnold, Nottingham, UK.

The success of spermatid microinjection has generated many concerns. In particular, there is a lack of appropriate methodology for the isolation of large homogeneous populations of spermatids, with minimum loss of viability, from the testicular tissue of azoospermic men. Here we have compared two different isolation methods -- velocity sedimentation under unit gravity (VSUG) combined with discontinuous Percoll centrifugation (DPC), and separation with fluorescent-activated cell sorter (FACS) using light in the visible range -- to determine the most suitable method for the isolation of spermatids. Total mixed cell count/gram of testicular parenchyma was significantly higher in obstructive azoospermic men compared with non-obstructive azoospermic men (P < 0.001). The results of the comparison showed that in obstructive azoospermic patients the difference in the yields of primary spermatocytes produced by the two techniques was not significant, but for round and elongating spermatids the FACS separation proved to be the better method (P < 0.001). Similarly, in non-obstructive azoospermic patients, FACS separation proved to be superior, giving increased yields of primary spermatocytes and round and elongating spermatids compared with VSUG combined with DPC method (P < 0.001). More than 99 % of the separated cells retained their viability after FACS separation. As large homogeneous populations of viable spermatids can be separated with FACS in a relatively short period of time, FACS separation is the most suitable method for the isolation of spermatids from testicular biopsy tissue.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
S. Coskun, A. Tbakhi, K. A. Jaroudi, M. Uzumcu, T. A. Merdad, and K. A. Al-Hussein
Flow cytometric ploidy analysis of testicular biopsies from sperm-negative wet preparations
Hum. Reprod., April 1, 2002; 17(4): 977 - 983.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
L. Johnson, C. Staub, W. B. Neaves, and R. Yanagimachi
Live human germ cells in the context of their spermatogenic stages
Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2001; 16(8): 1575 - 1582.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
I. Aslam, S. Fishel, H. Moore, K. Dowell, and S. Thornton
Fertility preservation of boys undergoing anti-cancer therapy: a review of the existing situation and prospects for the future: Opinion
Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2000; 15(10): 2154 - 2159.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
Y. Prapas, A. Chatziparasidou, P. Vanderzwalmen, M. Nijs, N. Prapas, B. Lejeune, G. Vlassis, and R. Schoysman
Spermatid injection: Reconsidering spermatid injection
Hum. Reprod., September 1, 1999; 14(9): 2186 - 2188.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
P. Sutovsky, J. Ramalho-Santos, R. D. Moreno, R. Oko, L. Hewitson, and G. Schatten
On-stage selection of single round spermatids using a vital, mitochondrion-specific fluorescent probe MitoTrackerTM and high resolution differential interference contrast microscopy
Hum. Reprod., September 1, 1999; 14(9): 2301 - 2312.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
I. Aslam and S. Fishel
Evaluation of the fertilization potential of freshly isolated, in-vitro cultured and cryopreserved human spermatids by injection into hamster oocytes
Hum. Reprod., June 1, 1999; 14(6): 1528 - 1533.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
N. Cremades, R. Bernabeu, A. Barros, and M. Sousa
In-vitro maturation of round spermatids using co-culture on Vero cells
Hum. Reprod., May 1, 1999; 14(5): 1287 - 1293.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
L. Gandini, A. Lenzi, F. Lombardo, R. Pacifici, and F. Dondero
Immature germ cell separation using a modified discontinuous Percoll gradient technique in human semen
Hum. Reprod., April 1, 1999; 14(4): 1022 - 1027.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
A. Ziyyat, B. Lassalle, J. Testart, P. Briot, E. Amar, C. Finaz, and A. Lefevre
Flow cytometry isolation and reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction characterization of human round spermatids in infertile patients
Hum. Reprod., February 1, 1999; 14(2): 379 - 387.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
B. Lassalle, A. Ziyyat, J. Testart, C. Finaz, and A. Lefevre
Flow cytometric method to isolate round spermatids from mouse testis
Hum. Reprod., February 1, 1999; 14(2): 388 - 394.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.