Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
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 (21)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Verheyen, G.
Right arrow Articles by Van Steirteghem, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Verheyen, G.
Right arrow Articles by Van Steirteghem, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 14, No. 9, 2313-2319, September 1999
© 1999 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

Controlled comparison of conventional in-vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection in patients with asthenozoospermia

G. Verheyen1, H. Tournaye, C. Staessen, A. De Vos, M. Vandervorst and A. Van Steirteghem

Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Academic Hospital, Dutch-speaking Brussels Free University, Laarbeeklaan 101, B-1090 Brussels, Belgium

A controlled comparison between conventional in-vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) has been carried out for patients with <=5% rapid progressive (type A) spermatozoa in their fresh semen. Twenty couples were allocated to the study. All semen samples fulfilled the minimum criteria to be allocated to the conventional IVF programme. The two pronuclear (2PN) fertilization rate per retrieved cumulus–oocyte complex was significantly higher after ICSI (63.4%) than after conventional IVF (22.9%), with complete fertilization failure after IVF in 10 out of the 20 cycles. Embryo quality was similar for both treatments. Sixteen patients received only ICSI embryos, two patients only IVF embryos and two patients received IVF and ICSI embryos. The ongoing clinical pregnancy rate was 45%, the implantation rate was 37%. Comparison of the characteristics of patients/cycles with and without 2PN fertilization revealed a higher proportion of progressively motile spermatozoa in the prepared sperm fraction for the group of patients with fertilization after conventional IVF. It can be concluded from this study that absence of or an extremely low proportion of rapid progressive motility in fresh semen indicates a high risk of complete fertilization failure with conventional IVF.

Key words: asthenozoospermia/controlled study/fertilization failure/IVF versus ICSI/motility

1 To whom correspondence should be addressed


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
C. Sifer, T. Sasportes, V. Barraud, C. Poncelet, J. Rudant, R. Porcher, I. Cedrin-Durnerin, B. Martin-Pont, J.N. Hugues, and J.P. Wolf
World Health Organization grade 'a' motility and zona-binding test accurately predict IVF outcome for mild male factor and unexplained infertilities
Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2005; 20(10): 2769 - 2775.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
M. Plachot, J. Belaisch-Allart, J.-M. Mayenga, A. Chouraqui, L. Tesquier, and A. M. Serkine
Outcome of conventional IVF and ICSI on sibling oocytes in mild male factor infertility
Hum. Reprod., February 1, 2002; 17(2): 362 - 369.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
S. Fishel, I. Aslam, F. Lisi, L. Rinaldi, J. Timson, M. Jacobson, L. Gobetz, S. Green, A. Campbell, and R. Lisi
Should ICSI be the treatment of choice for all cases of in-vitro conception?
Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2000; 15(6): 1278 - 1283.
[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.