Cited by 70Sperm and Testicular FunctionReproductive Health and TechnologiesMale Reproductive Health Studies

Sperm morphology analysis (strict criteria) in male infertility is not a prognostic factor in intrauterine insemination with husband’s sperm

Open access
Matorras, Roberto, Corcóstegui, Beatriz, Perez, Carlos, Mandiola, Maria, Mendoza, Rosario, Rodríguez-Escudero, Francisco Javier·1995·Fertility and Sterility

Abstract

Objective To assess the prognostic value of strict sperm morphology analysis in intrauterine insemination with husband's sperm (IUI) cycles performed because of male infertility. Design Prospective study. Setting Academic tertiary hospital. Patients Seventy-four consecutive couples subjected to 271 IUI cycles because of male infertility. Main outcome measure Strict morphology analysis 1 month before the beginning of IUI following the criteria of Kruger et al. Results Pregnancy and no pregnancy couples were similar regarding strict normal forms (2.85% +/- 2.07% versus 3.13% +/- 2.63%), slightly amorphous forms, and the morphology index (11.79 +/- 6.06 versus 12.04 +/- 7.13). Pregnancy rates (PRs) were similar when normal forms were 4% (35.7%). The PR, although higher in the group with morphology index > 10% (41.4%) than in the group 10% (50.0%) than in the group Conclusion Strict morphology analysis 1 month before the beginning of IUI is not a useful prognostic factor in IUI performed because of male infertility.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)57434-2

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Recent studies have called into question the predictive value of sperm morphology for pregnancy and the need to move directly to ICSI in those with teratozoospermia.

    “Recent studies have called into question the predictive value of sperm morphology for pregnancy and the need to move directly to ICSI in those with teratozoospermia (Matorras et al., 1995;Karabinus & Gelety, 1997;Check et al., 2007;Deveneau et al., 2014).”
  • Studies examining sperm morphology and pregnancy outcomes following IUI and IVF have produced variable results.

    “In the context of these aforementioned limitations, studies have been performed examining sperm morphology and pregnancy outcomes following IUI7891011 and IVF112131415161718 with variable results.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Matorras, R., Corcóstegui, B., Perez, C., Mandiola, M., Mendoza, R., & Rodríguez-Escudero, F. J.
Affiliations
Hospital de Cruces (ES)
Venue
Fertility and Sterility
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1995-03
Volume
63
Issue
3
Pages
608-611
ISSN
0015-0282 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2344957300
Cited by
70
References
18
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
4.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Fertility and Sterility (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Sperm and Testicular Function
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Male Reproductive Health Studies
Keywords
sperm morphology, male infertility, intrauterine insemination, pregnancy rate, prognostic factors
MeSH terms
Adult, Age Factors, Endometriosis, Female, Humans, Infertility, Male, Insemination, Artificial, Homologous, Male, Predictive Value of Tests, Pregnancy, Prognosis, Prospective Studies, Spermatozoa, Treatment Outcome

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