Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Scopus||Web of Science®||Altmetric|
|Title:||Measuring sperm DNA fragmentation and clinical outcomes of medically assisted reproduction: a systematic review and meta analysis|
Van Wely, M.
De Bruin, J.
|Citation:||PLoS ONE, 2016; 11(11):e0165125|
|Maartje Cissen, Madelon van Wely, Irma Scholten, Steven Mansell, Jan Peter de Bruin, Ben Willem Mol, Didi Braat, Sjoerd Repping, Geert Hamer|
|Abstract:||Sperm DNA fragmentation has been associated with reduced fertilization rates, embryo quality, pregnancy rates and increased miscarriage rates. Various methods exist to test sperm DNA fragmentation such as the sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA), the sperm chromatin dispersion (SCD) test, the terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase mediated deoxyuridine triphosphate nick end labelling (TUNEL) assay and the single cell gel electrophoresis (Comet) assay. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the value of measuring sperm DNA fragmentation in predicting chance of ongoing pregnancy with IVF or ICSI. Out of 658 unique studies, 30 had extractable data and were thus included in the meta-analysis. Overall, the sperm DNA fragmentation tests had a reasonable to good sensitivity. A wide variety of other factors may also affect the IVF/ICSI outcome, reflected by limited to very low specificity. The constructed hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curve indicated a fair discriminatory capacity of the TUNEL assay (area under the curve (AUC) of 0.71; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.74) and Comet assay (AUC of 0.73; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.97). The SCSA and the SCD test had poor predictive capacity. Importantly, for the TUNEL assay, SCD test and Comet assay, meta-regression showed no differences in predictive value between IVF and ICSI. For the SCSA meta-regression indicated the predictive values for IVF and ICSI were different. The present review suggests that current sperm DNA fragmentation tests have limited capacity to predict the chance of pregnancy in the context of MAR. Furthermore, sperm DNA fragmentation tests have little or no difference in predictive value between IVF and ICSI. At this moment, there is insufficient evidence to recommend the routine use of sperm DNA fragmentation tests in couples undergoing MAR both for the prediction of pregnancy and for the choice of treatment. Given the significant limitations of the evidence and the methodological weakness and design of the included studies, we do urge for further research on the predictive value of sperm DNA fragmentation for the chance of pregnancy after MAR, also in comparison with other predictors of pregnancy after MAR.|
|Keywords:||Sperm; DNA fragmentation; Pregnancy; Meta-analysis; DNA damage; Chromatin; Semen; Systematic reviews|
|Rights:||© 2016 Cissen et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.|
|Appears in Collections:||Genetics publications|
Files in This Item:
|hdl_113239.pdf||Published Version||1.53 MB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.