Sharma Aditya P, Sharma Gopal, Kumar Rajeev
Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Urology. 2022 Mar;161:4-11. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2021.10.041. Epub 2021 Dec 4.
To study the effect of 3 antioxidants viz. selenium, carnitine and coenzyme Q10, alone or in combination, on both semen parameters and pregnancy rates in couples with male factor infertility.
Using PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was performed of the PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases for randomized studies comparing selenium, carnitine or coenzyme Q10 with placebo in the treatment of male infertility and reporting semen and pregnancy outcomes.
A total of 3304 studies were screened of which 20 were included. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020210284). Pregnancy rate in the treatment group (69/426, 16.2%) was not different from the placebo (45/401, 11.2%) (P = .05). Treatment group showed higher motility [mean difference 5.05, 95% CI (2.77, 7.34), P =<.0001], progressive motility [mean difference 5.72, 95% CI (2.77, 8.66), P = .0001], sperm concentration [mean difference 6.58, 95% CI (3.22, 9.93), P = .0001] than placebo.
Although antioxidants and their combinations are associated with improvement in sperm concentration, motility, and semen volume, the differences are small. There is no difference in pregnancy rates between patients receiving selenium, carnitine, and coenzyme Q10, or placebo. The quality of studies is poor, limiting the level of evidence.
研究三种抗氧化剂,即硒、肉碱和辅酶Q10单独或联合使用对男性因素不育夫妇精液参数和妊娠率的影响。
按照PRISMA指南,对PubMed、Scopus、EMBASE和Web of Science数据库进行系统检索,查找比较硒、肉碱或辅酶Q10与安慰剂治疗男性不育并报告精液和妊娠结局的随机研究。
共筛选出3304项研究,其中20项被纳入。该研究方案已在PROSPERO注册(CRD42020210284)。治疗组的妊娠率(69/426,16.2%)与安慰剂组(45/401,11.2%)无差异(P = 0.05)。治疗组的精子活力[平均差异5.05,95%可信区间(2.77,7.34),P < 0.0001]、前向运动率[平均差异5.72,95%可信区间(2.77,8.66),P = 0.0001]、精子浓度[平均差异6.58,95%可信区间(3.22,9.93),P = 0.0001]均高于安慰剂组。
尽管抗氧化剂及其组合与精子浓度、活力和精液量的改善有关,但差异较小。接受硒、肉碱、辅酶Q10或安慰剂治疗的患者之间妊娠率无差异。研究质量较差,限制了证据水平。