Bartoov B, Eltes F, Pansky M, Lederman H, Caspi E, Soffer Y
Health Science Research Centre, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel.
Hum Reprod. 1993 Jan;8(1):65-70. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137876.
The aim of this study was to evaluate diagnostic profiles for the assessment of semen analysis data with respect to male fertility potential. Semen samples taken from 208 patients of known fertility and suspected infertility were studied by conventional semen analysis methods. The data throw doubt upon the validity of an approach based on the number of deviations from the normal standard values defined by the World Health Organization. The alternative approach of a specific semen characteristic (particularly morphology) as the major predictor of fertility produced no beneficial results. However, the semen analysis index based on semen volume, sperm count, percentage motility and normal forms resulted in a high accuracy of classification but for only 44% of the cases, with 3% false negatives and 10% false positives using cut-off indices of > or = 0.6 and < or = -1.0 for defining 'fertile' and 'infertile' zones, respectively. In conclusion, it is emphasized that there are a number of specific semen analysis variables, each expressing a different aspect of male fertility potential which, when combined in correct proportion, do provide the optimal evaluation of the male fertility status. However, in order to increase the prognostic potential of the semen sample, new and meaningful parameters must be discovered.
本研究的目的是评估用于评估精液分析数据与男性生育潜力的诊断概况。采用传统精液分析方法对208例已知生育能力和疑似不育的患者采集的精液样本进行了研究。数据对基于偏离世界卫生组织定义的正常标准值数量的方法的有效性提出了质疑。将特定精液特征(特别是形态)作为生育力主要预测指标的替代方法未产生有益结果。然而,基于精液量、精子计数、活力百分比和正常形态的精液分析指数分类准确率较高,但仅适用于44%的病例,分别使用>或 = 0.6和<或 = -1.0的截断指数来定义“可育”和“不育”区域时,假阴性率为3%,假阳性率为10%。总之,需要强调的是,有许多特定的精液分析变量,每个变量都表达了男性生育潜力的不同方面,当以正确比例组合时,确实能对男性生育状况进行最佳评估。然而,为了提高精液样本的预测潜力,必须发现新的有意义的参数。