Cited by 71Sperm and Testicular FunctionReproductive Health and TechnologiesReproductive Biology and Fertility

A comparative analysis of embryo implantation potential in patients with severe teratozoospermia undergoing in-vitro fertilization with a high insemination concentration or intracytoplasmic sperm injection

Oehninger, S., Kruger, T.F., Simon, T., Jones, D., Mayer, J., Lanzendorf, S., Toner, J.P., Muasher, S.J.·1996·Human Reproduction

Abstract

The objective of this study was to assess fertilization, implantation and pregnancy rates in infertile patients with severe teratozoospermia [P (poor prognosis) pattern sperm morphology assessed by strict criteria] treated by in-vitro fertilization (IVF) using a high insemination concentration (HIC), or by intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). This was a retrospective cohort study performed in an academic tertiary institution. The outcome of 115 consecutive ICSI cycles was compared to that of a similar number of cycles of IVF with HIC performed during a similar time frame and matched by woman's age and basal serum (cycle day 3) follicle stimulating hormone concentrations. The inclusion criteria were sperm morphology /=1x10(6) total motile spermatozoa per ejaculate. The diploid fertilization rate in the HIC-IVF group was 86% and in the ICSI group 68% (P < 0.05). Importantly, an equal number of embryos was transferred to both groups of patients. The morphological quality of the embryos (proportion of transfers having superior morphology embryo scores) was significantly better in the ICSI group than in the patients receiving HIC-IVF. Although there was a clear trend for better implantation and pregnancy rates in the ICSI group, these differences were not statistically significant. We conclude that, although HIC-IVF resulted in a higher fertilization rate than ICSI in patients with severe teratozoospermia, ICSI produced a significantly higher proportion of morphologically supe…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019302

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Oehninger, S., Kruger, T. F., Simon, T., Jones, D., Mayer, J., Lanzendorf, S., Toner, J. P., & Muasher, S. J.
Affiliations
  • Eastern Virginia Medical School (US)
  • Tygerberg Hospital (ZA)
Venue
Human Reproduction
Published
1996-05-01
Volume
11
Issue
5
Pages
1086-1089
ISSN
  • 0268-1161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2350
OpenAlex
W2134788007
Cited by
71
References
17
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
6.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Human Reproduction (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
teratozoospermia, intracytoplasmic sperm injection, in vitro fertilization, embryo implantation potential, embryo morphology, fertilization rate, pregnancy rate, male infertility, sperm morphology
MeSH terms
Cytoplasm, Embryo Transfer, Female, Fertilization in Vitro, Humans, Infertility, Male, Male, Microinjections, Embryo Implantation, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Outcome, Retrospective Studies, Sperm Count, Sperm Motility, Spermatozoa, Cohort Studies

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