Tomlinson Mathew J, Naeem Asad
Fertility Unit, East Block B Floor, Nottingham University Hospital, Derby Road, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK.
Innovative Research Systems, 7 Newell Way, Perth, WA, 6062, Australia.
Reprod Fertil Dev. 2018 Jun;30(6):850-859. doi: 10.1071/RD17520.
CASA has been used in reproductive medicine and pathology laboratories for over 25 years, yet the 'fertility industry' generally remains sceptical and has avoided automation, despite clear weaknesses in manual semen analysis. Early implementers had difficulty in validating CASA-Mot instruments against recommended manual methods (haemocytometer) due to the interference of seminal debris and non-sperm cells, which also affects the accuracy of grading motility. Both the inability to provide accurate sperm counts and a lack of consensus as to the value of sperm kinematic parameters appear to have continued to have a negative effect on CASA-Mot's reputation. One positive interpretation from earlier work is that at least one or more measures of sperm velocity adds clinical value to the semen analysis, and these are clearly more objective than any manual motility analysis. Moreover, recent CASA-Mot systems offer simple solutions to earlier problems in eliminating artefacts and have been successfully validated for sperm concentration; as a result, they should be viewed with more confidence in relation to motility grading. Sperm morphology and DNA testing both require an evidence-based consensus and a well-validated (reliable, reproducible) assay to be developed before automation of either can be of real clinical benefit.
计算机辅助精子分析(CASA)在生殖医学和病理学实验室中已应用超过25年,但尽管手工精液分析存在明显缺陷,“生育行业”总体上仍持怀疑态度且一直回避自动化。早期使用者在根据推荐的手工方法(血细胞计数器)验证CASA-Mot仪器时遇到困难,因为精液碎片和非精子细胞的干扰会影响活力分级的准确性,这也影响了精子计数的准确性。无法提供准确的精子计数以及对精子运动学参数价值缺乏共识,似乎继续对CASA-Mot的声誉产生负面影响。早期研究的一个积极解读是,至少一项或多项精子速度测量为精液分析增加了临床价值,而且这些测量明显比任何手工活力分析更客观。此外,最近的CASA-Mot系统为早期消除假象问题提供了简单解决方案,并且已成功验证了精子浓度;因此,在活力分级方面应更有信心地看待它们。在精子形态学和DNA检测实现自动化并真正带来临床益处之前,都需要基于证据达成共识并开发经过充分验证(可靠、可重复)的检测方法。