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 arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hovav, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Yaffe, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hovav, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Yaffe, H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 17, No. 12, 3170-3172, December 2002
© 2002 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

Comparison of semen quality obtained by electroejaculation and spontaneous ejaculation in men suffering from ejaculation disorder

Yedidya Hovav1, Miriam Almagor and Haim Yaffe

Male Fertility Unit, Department of Obstetrics & Gnecology, Bikur Cholim Hospital, Strauss 5, Jerusalem 91004, Israel

BACKGROUND: Electroejaculation has become an accepted form of semen procurement in men suffering from anejaculation. However, sperm in these ejaculates often exhibit low motility. The aetiology of asthenozoospermia remains uncertain. It may be related to primary low-grade motility of sperm from anejaculatory men or to detrimental effects of the electroejaculation process itself. The aim of this study was to determine whether the procedure of electroejaculation alters the quality of the semen by comparing the characteristics of the electroejaculates with those of the normal ejaculates of the same patients. METHODS: Nine men suffering from ejaculation disorders underwent 14 procedures of electroejaculation. The sperm concentration and motility of the 14 samples from electroejaculation were compared with 20 collected at a later date after successful ejaculation by the same patients. RESULTS: The mean ± SD concentration of the electroejaculates was (52.3 ± 42.1)x106/ml and of the natural samples (67.4 ± 38.1)x106/ml. No statistical difference was found between the two groups. The mean percentage of sperm showing progressive motility following electroejaculation was 23.1 ± 18.8% and 36.3 ± 16.7% after spontaneous ejaculation. No statistical difference was found between the groups (P = 0.082). Likewise, the quality of sperm motility was similar after both methods of procurement. CONCLUSIONS: In our small-sized study group (nine men with ejaculation disorders), the concentration and the motility of sperm obtained by electroejaculation were not significantly different from sperm obtained naturally.

Key words: anejaculation/electroejaculation/sperm quality

1 To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: spl113{at}netvision.net.il


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




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.