A randomized study of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) versus subzonal insemination (SUZI) for the management of severe male-factor infertility

1995 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 319-321 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Levran ◽  
David Bider ◽  
Michal Yonesh ◽  
Ziva Yemini ◽  
Daniel S. Seidman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Male Factor Infertility ◽  
Male Factor ◽  
Subzonal Insemination

scholarly journals In vitro fertilisation (IVF) versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in patients without severe male factor infertility: study protocol for the randomised, controlled, multicentre trial INVICSI

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e051058
Author(s):  
Sine Berntsen ◽  
Bugge Nøhr ◽  
Marie Louise Grøndahl ◽  
Morten Rønn Petersen ◽  
Lars Franch Andersen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Live Birth ◽  
Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Male Partner ◽  
In Vitro Fertilisation ◽  
Male Factor Infertility ◽  
Male Factor ◽  
Fertilisation Rate ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionOver the last decades, the use of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) has increased, even among patients without male factor infertility. The increase has happened even though there is no evidence to support that ICSI results in higher live birth rates compared with conventional in vitro fertilisation (IVF) in cases with nonmale factor infertility. The lack of robust evidence on an advantage of using ICSI over conventional IVF in these patients is problematic since ICSI is more invasive, complex and requires additional resources, time and effort. Therefore, the primary objective of the IVF versus ICSI (INVICSI) study is to determine whether ICSI is superior to standard IVF in patients without severe male factor infertility. The primary outcome measure is first live birth from fresh and frozen-thawed transfers after one stimulated cycle. Secondary outcomes include fertilisation rate, ongoing pregnancy rate, birth weight and congenital anomalies.Methods and analysisThis is a two-armed, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial. In total, 824 couples/women with infertility without severe male factor will be recruited and allocated randomly into two groups (IVF or ICSI) in a 1:1 ratio. Participants will be randomised in variable block sizes and stratified by trial site and age. The main inclusion criteria are (1) no prior IVF/ICSI treatment, (2) male partner sperm with an expected count of minimum 2 million progressive motile spermatozoa following density gradient purification on the day of oocyte pick up and (3) age of the woman between 18 and 42 years.Ethics and disseminationThe study will be performed in accordance with the ethical principles in the Helsinki Declaration. The study is approved by the Scientific Ethical Committee of the Capital Region of Denmark. Study findings will be presented, irrespectively of results at international conferences and submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT04128904. Pre-results.

scholarly journals Intracytoplasmic sperm injection: state of the art in humans

Reproduction ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 154 (6) ◽  
pp. F93-F110 ◽  
Author(s):  
G D Palermo ◽  
C L O’Neill ◽  
S Chow ◽  
S Cheung ◽  
A Parrella ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection ◽  
Poor Prognosis ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Semen Analysis ◽  
Reproductive Technology ◽  
Male Factor Infertility ◽  
Male Factor ◽  
Current Application ◽  
Infertile Couples ◽  
The Impact

Among infertile couples, 25% involve both male and female factors, while male factor alone accounts for another 25% due to oligo-, astheno-, teratozoospermia, a combination of the three, or even a complete absence of sperm cells in the ejaculate and can lead to a poor prognosis even with the help of assisted reproductive technology (ART). Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) has been with us now for a quarter of a century and in spite of the controversy generated since its inception, it remains in the forefront of the techniques utilized in ART. The development of ICSI in 1992 has drastically decreased the impact of male factor, resulting in millions of pregnancies worldwide for couples who, without ICSI, would have had little chance of having their own biological child. This review focuses on the state of the art of ICSI regarding utility of bioassays that evaluate male factor infertility beyond the standard semen analysis and describes the current application and advances in regard to ICSI, particularly the genetic and epigenetic characteristics of spermatozoa and their impact on reproductive outcome.

P-244 Hysteroscopic tubal transfer of ova after intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) as a treatment for severe male factor infertility

1997 ◽  
Vol 68 ◽  
pp. S209
Author(s):  
J.J Knickerbocker ◽  
K.A Thompson ◽  
E.A Riley ◽  
G Lopez ◽  
M Carpentieri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection ◽  
Male Factor Infertility ◽  
Male Factor

scholarly journals Overcoming male factor infertility with intracytoplasmic sperm injection

2017 ◽  
Vol 63 (8) ◽  
pp. 697-703 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edson Borges Jr. ◽  
Bianca Ferrarini Zanetti ◽  
Daniela Paes de Almeida Ferreira Braga ◽  
Amanda Souza Setti ◽  
Rita de Cássia Sávio Figueira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection ◽  
Maternal Age ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Male Factor Infertility ◽  
Male Factor ◽  
Vitro Fertilization ◽  
Tubal Factor ◽  
Icsi Outcomes

Summary Objective: To evaluate the effect of male factor infertility on intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) outcomes compared with a control group presenting isolated tubal factor. Method: This retrospective study included 743 couples undergoing ICSI as a result of isolated male factor and a control group consisting of 179 couples undergoing ICSI as a result of isolated tubal factor, performed in a private university- -affiliated in vitro fertilization center, between January/2010 and December/2016. Patients were divided into two groups according to maternal age: women ≤35 years old and >35 years old. The effects of infertility causes on laboratorial and clinical ICSI outcomes were evaluated using Student's t-test and (2 test. Results: No differences in controlled ovarian stimulation outcomes were observed between male factor cycles and tubal factor cycles in the two age groups. Implantation (male factor 35.5% vs. tubal factor 32.0%, p=0.340), pregnancy (male factor 46.9% vs. tubal factor 40.9%, p=0.184) and miscarriage (male factor 10.3% vs. tubal factor 10.6%, p=0.572) rates were similar between the infertility groups, irrespective of female age. Considering maternal age, the cancelation rate was higher in older women (>35 years old) undergoing ICSI as a result of male factor infertility (17.4% vs. 8.9%, p=0.013). Conclusion: Our results showed that there is no difference in the outcomes of pregnancy between couples with male or tubal factor infertility, which indicates that ICSI surpasses the worse specific outcomes associated with male factor.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document