Steven A Vasilescu, Dale M Goss, Kathryn H Gurner, Rebecca L Kelley, Maria Mazi, Fabrice K De Bond, Jennifer Lorimer, Fabrizzio Horta, Farin Y Parast, David K Gardner, Reza Nosrati, Majid E Warkiani
{"title":"A biomimetic sperm selection device for routine sperm selection.","authors":"Steven A Vasilescu, Dale M Goss, Kathryn H Gurner, Rebecca L Kelley, Maria Mazi, Fabrice K De Bond, Jennifer Lorimer, Fabrizzio Horta, Farin Y Parast, David K Gardner, Reza Nosrati, Majid E Warkiani","doi":"10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.104433","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Research question: </strong>Can a biomimetic microfluidic sperm sorter isolate motile sperm while minimizing DNA damage in comparison with density gradient centrifugation (DGC)?</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This was a two-phase study of 61 men, consisting of a proof-of-concept study with 21 donated semen samples in a university research laboratory, followed by a diagnostic andrology study with 40 consenting patients who presented at a fertility clinic for semen diagnostics. Each sample was split to perform DGC and microfluidic sperm selection (one-step sperm selection with 15 min of incubation) side-by-side. Outcomes evaluated included concentration, progressive motility, and DNA fragmentation index (DFI) of raw semen, and sperm isolated using DGC and the microfluidic device. Results were analysed using Friedman's test for non-parametric data (significant when P < 0.05). DFI values were assessed by sperm chromatin dispersion assay.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sperm isolated using DGC and the microfluidic device showed improved DFI values and motility compared with the raw semen sample in both cohorts. However, the microfluidic device was significantly better than DGC at reducing DFI values in both the proof-of-concept study (P = 0.012) and the diagnostic andrology study (P < 0.001). Progressive motility was significantly higher for sperm isolated using the microfluidic device in the proof-of-concept study (P = 0.0061) but not the diagnostic andrology study. Sperm concentration was significantly lower for samples isolated using the microfluidic device compared with DGC for both cohorts (P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Channel-based biomimetic sperm selection can passively select motile sperm with low DNA fragmentation. When compared with DGC, this method isolates fewer sperm but with a higher proportion of progressively motile cells and greater DNA integrity.</p>","PeriodicalId":21134,"journal":{"name":"Reproductive biomedicine online","volume":"50 2","pages":"104433"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reproductive biomedicine online","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.104433","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Research question: Can a biomimetic microfluidic sperm sorter isolate motile sperm while minimizing DNA damage in comparison with density gradient centrifugation (DGC)?
Design: This was a two-phase study of 61 men, consisting of a proof-of-concept study with 21 donated semen samples in a university research laboratory, followed by a diagnostic andrology study with 40 consenting patients who presented at a fertility clinic for semen diagnostics. Each sample was split to perform DGC and microfluidic sperm selection (one-step sperm selection with 15 min of incubation) side-by-side. Outcomes evaluated included concentration, progressive motility, and DNA fragmentation index (DFI) of raw semen, and sperm isolated using DGC and the microfluidic device. Results were analysed using Friedman's test for non-parametric data (significant when P < 0.05). DFI values were assessed by sperm chromatin dispersion assay.
Results: Sperm isolated using DGC and the microfluidic device showed improved DFI values and motility compared with the raw semen sample in both cohorts. However, the microfluidic device was significantly better than DGC at reducing DFI values in both the proof-of-concept study (P = 0.012) and the diagnostic andrology study (P < 0.001). Progressive motility was significantly higher for sperm isolated using the microfluidic device in the proof-of-concept study (P = 0.0061) but not the diagnostic andrology study. Sperm concentration was significantly lower for samples isolated using the microfluidic device compared with DGC for both cohorts (P < 0.001).
Conclusions: Channel-based biomimetic sperm selection can passively select motile sperm with low DNA fragmentation. When compared with DGC, this method isolates fewer sperm but with a higher proportion of progressively motile cells and greater DNA integrity.
期刊介绍：
Reproductive BioMedicine Online covers the formation, growth and differentiation of the human embryo. It is intended to bring to public attention new research on biological and clinical research on human reproduction and the human embryo including relevant studies on animals. It is published by a group of scientists and clinicians working in these fields of study. Its audience comprises researchers, clinicians, practitioners, academics and patients.
Context:
The period of human embryonic growth covered is between the formation of the primordial germ cells in the fetus until mid-pregnancy. High quality research on lower animals is included if it helps to clarify the human situation. Studies progressing to birth and later are published if they have a direct bearing on events in the earlier stages of pregnancy.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
