scholarly journals The pioneering of intracytoplasmic sperm injection: historical perspectives

Reproduction ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 154 (6) ◽  
pp. F71-F77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zev Rosenwaks ◽  
Nigel Pereira
Keyword(s):  
Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Semen Parameters ◽  
Male Factor Infertility ◽  
Fertilization Failure ◽  
Male Factor ◽  
Live Births ◽  
Historical Perspectives ◽  
Mammalian Fertilization

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) has often been heralded as a ground-breaking technique that has transformed the treatment of couples with infertility. By injecting a single spermatozoon into the cytoplasm of the oocyte, ICSI bypasses the zona pellucida and increases the chances of fertilization and subsequent embryo development, independent of semen parameters. Ever since the first live births using ICSI were reported in 1992, ICSI has become the mainstay of treating male factor infertility as well as overcoming fertilization failure associated with conventional in vitro insemination. Today, ICSI is utilized in nearly 66% of all assisted reproductive treatments worldwide and has resulted in the birth of millions of babies. The primary goal of this review is to provide historical perspectives about the pioneering of ICSI. We begin by highlighting the scientific work of early investigators who elucidated the mechanisms central to mammalian fertilization. Furthermore, we briefly discuss how these findings contributed to the development of IVF for the treatment of infertility. We then emphasize the shortcomings of IVF in treating severe forms of male factor infertility and enumerate the micromanipulation techniques that were developed to circumvent these shortcomings. Finally, we indicate how the inadequacies of these micromanipulation techniques lead to the inception, application and popularity of ICSI.

scholarly journals Development of ICSI

Reproduction ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 156 (1) ◽  
pp. F51-F58 ◽  
Author(s):  
C L O’Neill ◽  
S Chow ◽  
Z Rosenwaks ◽  
G D Palermo
Keyword(s):  
Pregnancy Rate ◽  
Human Body ◽  
Assisted Reproductive Techniques ◽  
Semen Parameters ◽  
Male Factor Infertility ◽  
Fertilization Failure ◽  
Male Factor ◽  
Reproductive Techniques

The first conception outside of the human body that led to the birth of Louise Brown was a tremendous accomplishment, which opened the door to the utilization of assisted reproductive techniques globally. This brought the understanding that accomplishing life in a dish required several steps, the most obvious being the timing and characteristics of fertilization. It soon became obvious in the 1980s that the most disappointing phenomenon was unexpected and complete fertilization failure. Among the approaches that were attempted to treat male factor infertility, ICSI surfaced as the technique that brought the ratio of the gametes to 1:1 and was also able to grant consistent fertilization and a higher pregnancy rate. ICSI has now been implemented for a quarter of a century, proving itself as the ultimate technique utilizing ejaculated spermatozoa independent of the semen parameters and is the sole insemination method to be used with surgically retrieved spermatozoa. There are currently various indications for ICSI that are widely adopted, rendering it the most popular insemination method worldwide. The reliability of ICSI ensures its employment in upcoming techniques involving in vitro spermatogenesis and neogametogenesis.

scholarly journals The Impact of Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection in Non-Male Factor Infertility—A Critical Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 2616
Author(s):  
Tanya L. Glenn ◽  
Alex M. Kotlyar ◽  
David B. Seifer
Keyword(s):  
Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection ◽  
Live Birth Rate ◽  
Fertilization Rate ◽  
Male Factor Infertility ◽  
Fertilization Failure ◽  
Male Factor ◽  
Vitro Fertilization ◽  
Total Fertilization Failure ◽  
The Impact

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was originally designed to overcome barriers due to male factor infertility. However, a surveillance study found that ICSI use in non-male factor infertility increased from 15.4% to 66.9% between 1996 and 2012. Numerous studies have investigated fertilization rate, total fertilization failure, and live birth rate per cycle (LBR), comparing the use of ICSI versus conventional in vitro fertilization (IVF) for non-male factor infertility. The overwhelming conclusion shows no increase in fertilization rate or LBR per cycle with the use of ICSI for non-male factor infertility. The overuse of ICSI is likely related to the desire to avoid a higher rate of total fertilization failure in IVF. However, data supporting the benefit of using ICSI for non-male factor infertility is lacking, and 33 couples would need to be treated with ICSI unnecessarily to avoid one case of total fertilization failure. Such practice increases the cost to the patient, increases the burden on embryologist’s time, and is a misapplication of resources. Additionally, there remains conflicting data regarding the safety of offspring conceived by ICSI and potential damage to the oocyte. Thus, the use of ICSI should be limited to those with male factor infertility or a history of total fertilization factor infertility due to uncertainties of potential adverse impact and lack of proven benefit in non-male factor infertility.

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 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