Article Data

  • Views 321
  • Dowloads 108

Original Research

Open Access

Effects of different storage conditions of semen samples on the detection results of sperm DNA damage

  • Yuan-Hua Xu1
  • Jin-Chun Lu1,*,
  • Shan-Shan Tang1
  • Yan-Mei Ge1
  • Yuan-Jiao Liang1

1Center for Reproductive Medicine, Zhongda Hospital, Southeast University, 210037 Nanjing, Jiangsu, China

DOI: 10.22514/jomh.2024.192 Vol.20,Issue 11,November 2024 pp.120-126

Submitted: 08 April 2024 Accepted: 04 June 2024

Published: 30 November 2024

*Corresponding Author(s): Jin-Chun Lu E-mail: lujinchun@dndxfszdyy.wecom.work

Abstract

Standardizing the storage conditions of semen samples can improve the accuracy of detection results of sperm DNA fragmentation index (DFI) and reduce variability. This study aimed to investigate how different storage conditions affect the DFI results of sperm. To do this, thirty-five leftover semen samples were selected after routine testing. These samples had a sperm concentration of at least 10 × 106/mL, normal liquefaction, and no or few round cells. Each specimen was stored at room temperature (20 C) for 2 and 4 hours, chilled (2–8 C) for 1, 2 and 3 days, and frozen (−20 C) for 3, 5 and 7 days, respectively. Each sample was frozen and thawed three times repeatedly. The sperm DFI at different time points was detected by sperm chromatin structure analysis (SCSA) based on flow cytometry. The results showed no significant differences in the sperm DFI of semen samples stored at room temperature for 0, 2 and 4 hours, chilled for 1, 2 and 3 days and frozen for 3, 5 and 7 days (p > 0.05). There were also no significant differences in the sperm DFI of semen samples frozen-thawed 1, 2 and 3 times repeatedly (p > 0.05). In conclusion, storage at room temperature for less than 4 hours, chilling for less than 3 days, freezing for less than 7 days and repeated freezing-thawing for 3 times have no significant impact on the sperm DNA damage of semen samples with sperm concentration ≥10 × 106/mL, normal liquefaction, and no or few round cells found in routine semen examination.


Keywords

Sperm DNA damage; Flow cytometry; Sample storage; Freeze-thaw times; Standardization


Cite and Share

Yuan-Hua Xu,Jin-Chun Lu,Shan-Shan Tang,Yan-Mei Ge,Yuan-Jiao Liang. Effects of different storage conditions of semen samples on the detection results of sperm DNA damage. Journal of Men's Health. 2024. 20(11);120-126.

References

[1] Liu Y, Wang Y, Hu Y, Pan J, Teng X. Effect of different fertilization methods in patients with high sperm DNA fragmentation index. Chinese Journal of Birth Health & Heredity. 2022; 30: 1722–1725. (In Chinese)

[2] Lu JC. Related factors of sperm DNA damage: advances in studies. National Journal of Andrology. 2015; 21: 675–680. (In Chinese)

[3] Campos LGA, Requejo LC, Miñano CAR, Orrego JD, Loyaga EC, Cornejo LG. Correlation between sperm DNA fragmentation index and semen parameters in 418 men seen at a fertility center. JBRA Assisted Reproduction. 2021; 25: 349–357.

[4] World Health Organization. WHO laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen. 6th edn. World Health Organization: Geneva. 2021.

[5] Sabbaghian M, Hosseinifar H, Rafaee A, Gilani MAS. Assessment of the impact induced by different incubation time, storage time, storage medium and thawing methods on sperm DNA fragmentation assay: a before–after study. Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences. 2022; 15: 377–381.

[6] Evenson D, Jost L. Sperm chromatin structure assay is useful for fertility assessment. Methods in Cell Science. 2000; 22: 169–189.

[7] Lu JC. Detection items of andrology laboratories should be standardized. National Medical Journal of China. 2018; 98: 3789–3791. (In Chinese)

[8] Lu JC. High DNA stainability (HDS) should not be recommended as a marker for the detection of sperm DNA damage. Andrologia. 2022; 57: e14442.

[9] Yang F, Lu JC, Liu YY, Wu ZB, Xu YH, Tang SS. Establishment and evaluation of a flow cytometry technique reflecting the severity of human sperm DNA damage. National Journal of Andrology. 2020; 26: 989–995. (In Chinese)

[10] Lu JC, Wu ZB, Tang SS, Xu YH, Liu YY. Standardization and quality control for detection of sperm DNA damage by flow cytometry: a preliminary investigation. National Journal of Andrology. 2021; 27: 124–128. (In Chinese)

[11] Jia JP, He XQ, Jin YJ. Statistics. 7th edn. China Renmin University Press: Beijing. 2018.

[12] Lu JC, Jing J, Chen L, Ge YF, Feng RX, Liang YJ, et al. Analysis of human sperm DNA fragmentation index (DFI) related factors: a report of 1010 subfertile men in China. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology. 2018; 16: 23.

[13] Szabó A, Váncsa S, Hegyi P, Váradi A, Forintos A, Filipov T, et al. Lifestyle-, environmental-, and additional health factors associated with an increased sperm DNA fragmentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology. 2023; 21: 5.

[14] Komiya A, Kato M, Shibata H, Imamura Y, Sazuka T, Sakamoto S, et al. Results of lifestyle modification promotion and reproductive/general health check for male partners of couples seeking conception. Heliyon. 2023; 9: e15203.

[15] Drevet JR, Hallak J, Nasr-Esfahani MH, Aitken RJ. Reactive oxygen species and their consequences on the structure and function of mammalian spermatozoa. Antioxidants & Redox Signaling. 2022; 37: 481–500.

[16] Finelli R, Leisegang K, Kandil H, Agarwal A. Oxidative stress: a comprehensive review of biochemical, molecular, and genetic aspects in the pathogenesis and management of varicocele. The World Journal of Men’s Health. 2022; 40: 87–103.

[17] Sadeghi S, Del Gallego R, García-Colomer B, Gómez EA, Yániz JL, Gosálvez J, et al. Effect of sperm concentration and storage temperature on goat spermatozoa during liquid storage. Biology. 2020; 9: 300.

[18] Chua SC, Yovich SJ, Hinchliffe PM, Yovich JL. How well do semen analysis parameters correlate with sperm DNA fragmentation? A retrospective study from 2567 semen samples analyzed by the Halosperm test. Journal of Personalized Medicine. 2023; 13: 518.

[19] Aurich C. Recent advances in cooled-semen technology. Animal Reproduction Science. 2008; 107: 268–275.

[20] Marzano G, Moscatelli N, Di Giacomo M, Martino NA, Lacalandra GM, Dell’Aquila ME, et al. Centrifugation force and time alter CASA parameters and oxidative status of cryopreserved stallion sperm. Biology. 2020; 9: 22.

[21] Andrabi SW, Ara A, Saharan A, Jaffar M, Gugnani N, Esteves SC. Sperm DNA fragmentation: causes, evaluation and management in male infertility. JBRA Assisted Reproduction. 2024; 28: 306–319.

[22] Liu KS, Mao XD, Pan F, Chen YJ. Application of leukocyte subsets and sperm DNA fragment rate in infertile men with asymptomatic infection of genital tract. Annals of Palliative Medicine. 2021; 10: 1021.

[23] Liu KS, Mao XD, Pan F, An RF. Effect and mechanisms of reproductive tract infection on oxidative stress parameters, sperm DNA fragmentation, and semen quality in infertile males. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology. 2021; 19: 97.

[24] Moreno-Sepulveda J, Rajmil O. Seminal human papillomavirus infection and reproduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Andrology. 2021; 9: 478–502.

[25] Farahani L, Tharakan T, Yap T, Ramsay JW, Jayasena CN, Minhas S. The semen microbiome and its impact on sperm function and male fertility: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Andrology. 2021; 9: 115–144.

[26] Freitas-Ribeiro S, Carvalho AF, Costa M, Cerqueira MT, Marques AP, Reis RL, et al. Strategies for the hypothermic preservation of cell sheets of human adipose stem cells. PLOS ONE. 2019; 14: e0222597.

[27] Jackson RE, Bormann CL, Hassun PA, Rocha AM, Motta ELA, Serafini PC, et al. Effects of semen storage and separation techniques on sperm DNA fragmentation. Fertility and Sterility. 2010; 94: 2626–2630.

[28] López-Fernández C, Crespo F, Arroyo F, Fernández JL, Arana P, Johnston SD, et al. Dynamics of sperm DNA fragmentation in domestic animals II. The stallion. Theriogenology. 2007; 68: 1240–1250.


Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,200 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) DOAJ is a unique and extensive index of diverse open access journals from around the world, driven by a growing community, committed to ensuring quality content is freely available online for everyone.

SCImago The SCImago Journal & Country Rank is a publicly available portal that includes the journals and country scientific indicators developed from the information contained in the Scopus® database (Elsevier B.V.)

Publication Forum - JUFO (Federation of Finnish Learned Societies) Publication Forum is a classification of publication channels created by the Finnish scientific community to support the quality assessment of academic research.

Scopus: CiteScore 0.9 (2023) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Norwegian Register for Scientific Journals, Series and Publishers Search for publication channels (journals, series and publishers) in the Norwegian Register for Scientific Journals, Series and Publishers to see if they are considered as scientific. (https://kanalregister.hkdir.no/publiseringskanaler/Forside).

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top