{"title":"润滑剂凝胶的精子毒性测试:我们应该推荐“生育友好”的专业产品吗?","authors":"Joseph Tomlinson, Karen Pooley, Mathew Tomlinson","doi":"10.1080/14647273.2022.2053214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Couples trying to conceive or providing samples for Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) are advised against the use of lubricant-gels due to the risk of sperm-toxicity. However, gels now exist which are specifically formulated to help couples conceive but without consensus on their toxicity relative to non-specialist products. This study tested gels recently introduced as 'sperm friendly' (FertilSafe Plus, Fertile Check) alongside established lubricants intended for pleasure only using a recently published toxicity testing regime. Computer Assisted Sperm Analysis (CASA) was performed at 1 and 2 h on donor sperm (<i>n</i> = 12) pre-incubated with each gel (10% v/v) and controls. All gels led to a significant loss of motility/velocity at 1 and 2 h (<i>p</i> < 0.01), with the most significant loss from the 2 Durex pleasure products (11% and 15%, vs 47% progression) at 60 min, although these performed better than saliva (used as negative control). Incubation with FertilSafePlus led to the smallest loss of motility (24% vs 47%) at 1 h. Saliva and products designed for lubrication only exhibited the most negative effect on motility and those marketed as 'sperm safe' could be considered the best performers. Whether these affects are due to direct toxicity or are indirect due to other factors such as viscosity, pH or osmolality remains uncertain.</p>","PeriodicalId":13006,"journal":{"name":"Human Fertility","volume":"1 1","pages":"1028-1031"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sperm toxicity testing on lubricant gels: should we be recommending 'fertility-friendly' specialist products?\",\"authors\":\"Joseph Tomlinson, Karen Pooley, Mathew Tomlinson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14647273.2022.2053214\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Couples trying to conceive or providing samples for Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) are advised against the use of lubricant-gels due to the risk of sperm-toxicity. However, gels now exist which are specifically formulated to help couples conceive but without consensus on their toxicity relative to non-specialist products. This study tested gels recently introduced as 'sperm friendly' (FertilSafe Plus, Fertile Check) alongside established lubricants intended for pleasure only using a recently published toxicity testing regime. Computer Assisted Sperm Analysis (CASA) was performed at 1 and 2 h on donor sperm (<i>n</i> = 12) pre-incubated with each gel (10% v/v) and controls. All gels led to a significant loss of motility/velocity at 1 and 2 h (<i>p</i> < 0.01), with the most significant loss from the 2 Durex pleasure products (11% and 15%, vs 47% progression) at 60 min, although these performed better than saliva (used as negative control). Incubation with FertilSafePlus led to the smallest loss of motility (24% vs 47%) at 1 h. Saliva and products designed for lubrication only exhibited the most negative effect on motility and those marketed as 'sperm safe' could be considered the best performers. Whether these affects are due to direct toxicity or are indirect due to other factors such as viscosity, pH or osmolality remains uncertain.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13006,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Fertility\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"1028-1031\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Fertility\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2022.2053214\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/4/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Fertility","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2022.2053214","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/4/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Sperm toxicity testing on lubricant gels: should we be recommending 'fertility-friendly' specialist products?
Couples trying to conceive or providing samples for Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) are advised against the use of lubricant-gels due to the risk of sperm-toxicity. However, gels now exist which are specifically formulated to help couples conceive but without consensus on their toxicity relative to non-specialist products. This study tested gels recently introduced as 'sperm friendly' (FertilSafe Plus, Fertile Check) alongside established lubricants intended for pleasure only using a recently published toxicity testing regime. Computer Assisted Sperm Analysis (CASA) was performed at 1 and 2 h on donor sperm (n = 12) pre-incubated with each gel (10% v/v) and controls. All gels led to a significant loss of motility/velocity at 1 and 2 h (p < 0.01), with the most significant loss from the 2 Durex pleasure products (11% and 15%, vs 47% progression) at 60 min, although these performed better than saliva (used as negative control). Incubation with FertilSafePlus led to the smallest loss of motility (24% vs 47%) at 1 h. Saliva and products designed for lubrication only exhibited the most negative effect on motility and those marketed as 'sperm safe' could be considered the best performers. Whether these affects are due to direct toxicity or are indirect due to other factors such as viscosity, pH or osmolality remains uncertain.
期刊介绍:
Human Fertility is a leading international, multidisciplinary journal dedicated to furthering research and promoting good practice in the areas of human fertility and infertility. Topics included span the range from molecular medicine to healthcare delivery, and contributions are welcomed from professionals and academics from the spectrum of disciplines concerned with human fertility. It is published on behalf of the British Fertility Society.
The journal also provides a forum for the publication of peer-reviewed articles arising out of the activities of the Association of Biomedical Andrologists, the Association of Clinical Embryologists, the Association of Irish Clinical Embryologists, the British Andrology Society, the British Infertility Counselling Association, the Irish Fertility Society and the Royal College of Nursing Fertility Nurses Group.
All submissions are welcome. Articles considered include original papers, reviews, policy statements, commentaries, debates, correspondence, and reports of sessions at meetings. The journal also publishes refereed abstracts from the meetings of the constituent organizations.