CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 34Sperm and Testicular FunctionReproductive Health and TechnologiesReproductive Biology and Fertility

Outcome of conventional IVF and ICSI on sibling oocytes in the case of isolated teratozoospermia

Open access
Fan, Wei, wei Li, Shang, Li, Lei, Huang, Zhongying, Ma, Qianhong, Wang, Yan, Xiao, Zhun·2012·Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
DOI 10.1007/s10815-012-9823-xPMC PMC3463669
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Purpose To reevaluate the effect of isolated teratozoospermia on IVF and determine if there was any therapeutic benefit to isolated teratozoospermia by ICSI, since there are no widely accepted criteria for the treatment technique about isolated teratozoospermia. Methods A total of 441 couples with >20 million and progressive motility >30 % sperm undergoing their first IVF/ICSI cycle were included in the study between 2008 and 2010, for whom at least 8 oocytes were retrived. Isolated teratozoospermia was diagnosed in 183 of the included couples, and the rest couples (normal sperm morphology) were studied as control. Sibling oocytes were randomized to be inseminated either by ICSI or IVF. Fertilization rate, embryo quality, pregnancy rate, implantation rate and spontaneous abortion rate were assessed. Results There was no difference in the percentage of eggs fertilized, implantation rate, pregnancy rate and spontaneous abortion rate between conventional IVF and ICSI regardless of the percentage of normal morphology. The day 3 embryonic morphology and rate of development were not different despite the insemination method and percentage of normal morphology. Conclusion Because isolated teratozoospermia did not influence the major indices of IVF and the unnecessary use of ICSI is time-consuming, costly and potential risks, couples with isolated teratozoospermia need not be subjected to ICSI.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10815-012-9823-x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A study compared results between patients with isolated teratozoospermia (<4% strict criteria) (n=183) and a group with entirely normal sperm parameters (n=258) in attempts with at least eight oocytes, with half the oocytes randomised to IVF and half to ICSI; no significant difference was found in fertilisation rates, embryo morphology at Day 3, pregnancy rates or miscarriage rates between the IVF

    “A study compared results between patients with isolated teratozoospermia (< 4% strict criteria) (n = 183) and a group of patients with entirely normal sperm parameters (n = 258) in attempts with at least eight oocytes, with half the oocytes randomised to IVF and half to ICSI. No significant difference was found in fertilisation rates, embryo morphology at Day 3, pregnancy rates or miscarriage”

    From Recommendations for Human Sperm Morphology Assessment in 2025: An Expert Review From the French BLEFCO Group (2026) · cites this paper as [104]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The outcomes of IVF are not influenced by isolated teratozoospermia.

    “Similar findings were reported by Fan et al. who showed that the outcomes of IVF were not influenced by isolated teratozoospermia (95).”

    From Isolated teratozoospermia: revisiting its relevance in male infertility: a narrative review (2024) · cites this paper as [95]

  • Concerning fertilisation rate, one of the two randomised oocyte cohort studies found no significant impact on fertilisation rates, whereas the other observed higher fertilisation rates with ICSI than with IVF (72.6% vs 44.1%, p < 0.05).

    “Concerning fertilisation rate, one of this two found no significant impact on fertilisation rates [104], whereas the other observed higher fertilisation rates with ICSI than with IVF (72.6% vs. 44.1%, p < 0.05) [105].”

    From Recommendations for Human Sperm Morphology Assessment in 2025: An Expert Review From the French BLEFCO Group (2026) · cites this paper as [104]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 24

  1. Vawda AI, Gunby J, Younglai V. Semen parameters as predictors of in-vitro fertilization: the importance of strict criteria sperm morphology. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:1445-50.
  2. Lundin K, Soderlund B, Hamberger L. The relationship between sperm morphology and rates of fertilization, pregnancy and spon- taneous abortion in an in-vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection programme. Hum Reprod. 1997;12:2676-81.
  3. Robinson JN, Lockwood GM, Dokras A, Egan DM, Nicholson SC, Ross C, et al. Does isolated teratozoospermia affect perfor- mance in in-vitro fertilization and embryo transfer? Hum Reprod. 1994;9:870-4.
  4. Yue Z, Meng FJ, Jorgensen N, Ziebe S, Andersen AN. Sperm morphology using strict cri-teria after Percoll density separation: influence on cleavage and pregnancy rates after in-vitro fertiliza- tion. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:1781-5.
  5. Cowan DB, Santis M, Keefe T, Hargreaves CA, Howell RJS, Homa ST. A bridge to intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection-high insemination concentrations benefit patients who have a reduced chance of fertilization with standard in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:1985-9.
  6. Dumoulin JCM, Coonen E, Bras M, Bergers-Janssen JM, Ignoul-Vanvuchelen RCM, van Wissen LCP, et al. Embryo develop- ment and chromosomal anomalies after ICSI: effect of the injection procedure. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:306-12.
  7. Schnorr J, Brown S, Oehninger S, Mayer J, Muasher S, Lanzendorf S. Impact of intracytoplasmic sperm injection on embryo cryopres- ervation and clinical outcome. Fertil Steril. 2001;75(3):636-7.
  8. Macas E, Imthurn B, Borsos M, Rosselli M, Maurer-Major E, Keller PJ. Impairment of the developmental potential of frozen- thawed human zygotes obtained after intracytoplasmic sperm in- jection. Fertil Steril. 1998;69(4):630-5.
  9. Wennerholm UB, Bergh C, Hamberger L, Lundin K, Nilsson L, Wikland M, et al. Incidence of congenital malformations in chil- dren born after ICSI. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:944-8.
  10. Chang PL, Sauer MV, Brown SY. Chromosome microdeletion in a father and his four infertile sons. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:2689-94.
  11. World Health Organization. WHO laboratory manual for the ex- amination of human semen and semen-cervical mucus interaction. 4th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999.
  12. Tournaye H, Verheyen G, Albano C, Camus M, Van Landuyt L, Devroey P, et al. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection versus in vitro fertilization: a randomized controlled trial and a meta-analysis of the literature. Fertil Steril. 2002;78:1030-7.
  13. Hwang JL, Seow KM, Lin YH, Hsieh BC, Huang LW, Chen HJ, et al. IVF versus ICSI in sibling oocytes from patients with polycystic ovarian syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(5):1261-5.
  14. Coetzee K, Kruge TF, Lombard CJ. Predictive value of normal sperm morphology: a structured literature review. Hum Reprod Update. 1998;4:73-82.
  15. Osawa Y, Sueoka K, Iwata S, Shinohara M, Kobayashi N, Kuji N, et al. Assessment of the dominant abnormal form is useful for predicting the outcome of intracytoplasmic sperm injection in the case of severe teratozoospermia. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1999;16:436- 42.
  16. Keegan BR, Barton S, Sanchez X, Berkeley AS, Krey LC, Grifo J. Isolated teratozoospermia does not affect in vitro fertilization out- come and is not an indication for intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril. 2007;88(6):1583-8.
  17. Parinaud J, Mieusset R, Vieitez G, Labal B, Richoilley G. Influence of sperm parameters on embryo quality. Fertil Steril. 1993;60(5):888-92.
  18. Terriou P, Giorgetti C, Auquier P, Hans E, Spach JL, Salzmann J, et al. Teratozoospermia influences fertilization rate in vitro but not embryo quality. Hum Reprod. 1997;12:1069-72.
  19. Cohen J, Alikani M, Munne S, Palermo G. Micromanipulation in clinical management of fertility disorders. Semin Reprod Endocri- nol. 1994;12:151-6.
  20. Mansour RT, Aboulghar MA, Serour GI, Amin YM, Ramzi AM. The effect of sperm parameters on the outcome of intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril. 1995;64:982-6.
  21. Braude BV, Moore S. Human gene expression first occurs between the four-and eight-cell stage of preimplantaion development. Nature. 1988;332:459-61.
  22. Ahmadi A, Ng SC. Fertilizing ability of DNA-damaged spermato- zoa. J Exp Zool. 1999;284:696-704.
  23. O'Brien J, Zini A. Sperm DNA integrity and male infertility. Urology. 2005;65:16-22.
  24. Hotaling JM, Smith JF, Rosen M, Muller CH, Walsh TJ. The relationship between isolated teratozoospermia and clinical preg- nancy after in vitro fertilization with or without intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:1141-5.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fan, W., wei Li, S., Li, L., Huang, Z., Ma, Q., Wang, Y., & Xiao, Z.
Affiliations
Sichuan University (CN)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2012-06-26
Volume
29
Issue
9
Pages
905-910
ISSN
  • 0740-7769 (ISSN-L)
  • 1058-0468
  • 1573-7330
DOI
10.1007/s10815-012-9823-x
PMC
PMC3463669
OpenAlex
W2040191348
Cited by
34
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 4
FWCI
1.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Sperm and Testicular Function
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Biology and Fertility
Keywords
intracytoplasmic sperm injection, conventional IVF, sperm morphology, sibling oocytes, fertilization rate, embryo quality, implantation rate, pregnancy rate, miscarriage, male infertility
MeSH terms
Abortion, Spontaneous, Embryo, Mammalian, Female, Fertilization in Vitro, Humans, Infertility, Male, Male, Oocytes, Embryo Implantation, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Outcome, Retrospective Studies, Sperm Count, Sperm Motility, Spermatozoa, Time Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Case-Control Studies, Treatment Outcome, Pregnancy Rate, Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic, Embryonic Development, Cell Shape, Oocyte Retrieval

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review