Reproduction Unit, Hospital 'Virgen de las Nieves', E-18014 Granada, Spain.
Reprod Biomed Online. 2010 Jan;20(1):114-24. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2009.10.024. Epub 2009 Nov 10.
The present study is based on a PubMed search and compares the clinical validity of classical semen parameters (CSP) and the sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA) in different clinical contexts. The PubMed database was searched using keywords on the sperm diagnostic test for pregnancy in three clinical scenarios: (i) couples attempting to conceive; (ii) couples who had been attempting to conceive for 12months without success; and (iii) couples treated with intrauterine insemination (IUI). There was a considerable heterogeneity among the studies included. For couples attempting to conceive following a SCSA that produced an abnormal result, the likelihood of male factor infertility ranged from a pre-test value of 7.5% to a post-test value of 32.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 15.7-54.5], while after CSP with an abnormal result, the post-test probability was 17.3% (95% CI 11.8-24.5). For a pre-test prevalence of male factor infertility of 50%, the post-test probability of male factor infertility after an abnormal test is very similar for both SCSA and CSP. In couples treated with IUI, the clinical validity of SCSA is higher than that of sperm morphology alone, but not enough to introduce SCSA as a test in male infertility work-up.
本研究基于 PubMed 检索,比较了经典精液参数 (CSP) 和精子染色质结构分析 (SCSA) 在不同临床背景下的临床有效性。在三种临床情况下(i)尝试受孕的夫妇;(ii)尝试受孕 12 个月而未成功的夫妇;(iii)接受宫腔内人工授精 (IUI) 治疗的夫妇,使用有关精子诊断测试妊娠的关键词在 PubMed 数据库中进行了搜索。纳入的研究存在相当大的异质性。对于接受 SCSA 检查结果异常的尝试受孕夫妇,男性因素不育的可能性从预测试值的 7.5%到后测试值的 32.1%不等[95%置信区间 (CI) 15.7-54.5],而 CSP 检查结果异常后,后测试概率为 17.3%(95%CI 11.8-24.5)。对于男性因素不育的预测试值为 50%,在 SCSA 和 CSP 检查异常后,男性因素不育的后测试概率非常相似。对于接受 IUI 治疗的夫妇,SCSA 的临床有效性高于精子形态学检查,但不足以将 SCSA 作为男性不育症检查的一项检查引入。