Cited by 1,159Sperm and Testicular FunctionReproductive Health and TechnologiesReproductive Biology and Fertility

Predictive value of abnormal sperm morphology in in vitro fertilization

Open access
Kruger, Thinus F., Acosta, Anibal A., Simmons, Kathryn F., Swanson, R. James, Matta, James F., Oehninger, Sergio·1988·Fertility and Sterility

Abstract

In patients with acceptable sperm count and motility, two patterns of abnormal morphology, judged with strict criteria, were identified and described. Patients with less than 4% normal forms and less than 30% morphology index (summation of normal and slightly amorphous forms) had a fertilization rate of 7.6% of the oocytes (P pattern, poor prognosis). Patients with normal morphology between 4 and 14% had a significantly better fertilization rate of 63.9% of the oocytes (P less than 0.0001). Cases with greater than 14% normal forms fertilized within the normal range for the laboratory. By evaluating sperm morphology with the proposed strict criteria, its predictive value in in vitro fertilization is enhanced.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)59660-5

Cites

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?

  • Kruger et al. reported that men with less than 4% sperm with normal morphology had a fertilization rate of 7.6% while those with normal morphology between 4% and 14% had a fertilization rate of 63.9%.

    “The predictive value of morphological assessment by strict criteria during IVF was first highlighted by Kruger et al. who reported that men with less than 4% sperm with normal morphology had a fertilization rate of 7.6% while those with normal morphology between 4% and 14% had a fertilization rate of 63.9% (90).”
  • Publications examining the impact of morphology on spontaneous pregnancy, intrauterine insemination, and in vitro fertilization reach varying conclusions.

    “Despite efforts to standardize methodology for grading sperm morphology, publications examining the impact morphology on spontaneous pregnancy, intrauterine insemination, and in vitro fertilization reach varying conclusions (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kruger, T. F., Acosta, A. A., Simmons, K. F., Swanson, R. J., Matta, J. F., & Oehninger, S.
Affiliations
Eastern Virginia Medical School (US)
Venue
Fertility and Sterility
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1988-01
Volume
49
Issue
1
Pages
112-117
ISSN
0015-0282 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W26653565
Cited by
1,159
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 36 · 2013: 42 · 2012: 41
FWCI
19.97
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 › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Biology and Fertility
Keywords
sperm morphology, abnormal sperm morphology, in vitro fertilization, fertilization rate, outcome prediction, male infertility, sperm count and motility
MeSH terms
Female, Fertilization in Vitro, Humans, Male, Oocytes, Ovulation Induction, Prognosis, Sperm Motility, Spermatozoa

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