Analysis of selected sperm samples by a computer-assisted system with high frame rate: A prospective study

Shan-Shan Tang; Jin-Chun Lu; Yuan-Hua Xu; Jing Wang; Ren-Yun Hong; Yan-Mei Ge; Yuan-Jiao Liang

doi:10.1002/hsr2.1217

Analysis of selected sperm samples by a computer-assisted system with high frame rate: A prospective study

Health Sci Rep. 2023 Apr 27;6(5):e1217. doi: 10.1002/hsr2.1217. eCollection 2023 May.

Authors

Shan-Shan Tang¹, Jin-Chun Lu¹, Yuan-Hua Xu¹, Jing Wang¹, Ren-Yun Hong¹, Yan-Mei Ge¹, Yuan-Jiao Liang¹

Affiliation

¹ Center for Reproductive Medicine, Zhongda Hospital Southeast University Nanjing Jiangsu China.

Abstract

Background and aims: Due to the rapid motility of the selected sperm, sperm parameters cannot be accurately determined by the manual method. So, the application of a computer-assisted sperm analysis system with a high frame rate (HFR-CASA, 85 Hz) in sperm selection is investigated.

Methods: A total of 177 semen samples were collected for sperm selection with density gradient centrifugation. Then, the manual method and HFR-CASA method will be used to observe and analyze the sperm concentration, motility, and percentage of progressively motile sperm (PR) of the selected sperm samples. The quality control of sperm concentration was performed with microballoons. Two selected sperm samples were analyzed 10 times repeatedly to evaluate the accuracy of the HFR-CASA.

Results: The results of microballoons analyzed with the HFR-CASA were in control. The coefficients of variation of sperm concentration, motility, and PR from two selected sperm samples were all below 10%. The results of 177 selected sperm samples analyzed by the manual method and HFR-CASA showed that although there were significant positive correlations in sperm concentration, motility, and PR between them (p < 0.001), the manual method significantly underestimated sperm concentration (p = 0.002) but overestimated sperm motility and PR (p < 0.001). When sperm concentration was below 50 × 10⁶/mL, the manual method significantly overestimated sperm concentration (p < 0.05). However, when sperm concentration was more than 100 × 10⁶/mL, the manual method significantly underestimated sperm concentration (p < 0.001). Regardless of sperm concentration, the manual method consistently overestimated sperm motility and PR (p < 0.001). When sperm concentration was more than 20 × 10⁶/mL, there was no correlation in sperm PR between them (p > 0.05). When sperm concentration was below 50 × 10⁶/mL, the correct rate of captured sperm by the HFR-CASA was more than 98%.

Conclusion: The HFR-CASA method is more accurate than the manual method in analyzing the selected sperm samples.

Keywords: computer‐assisted sperm analysis; density gradient centrifugation; frame rate; selected sperm.