Should we routinely perform sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) testing in fertility clinics?

Routine semen analysis provides limited diagnostic and prognostic insight into male reproductive potential, contributing to the increasing use of sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) testing in fertility evaluation. However, the clinical application of SDF testing appears to outpace the strength and consistency of the supporting evidence. This opinion paper critically appraises SDF testing through established screening, diagnostic, and prognostic test-performance frameworks, drawing on published observational studies, meta-analyses, and international guideline statements across natural conception and ART. The available evidence indicates that SDF testing does not meet the criteria for population-level screening or for routine diagnostic or prognostic use in unselected infertile populations and is frequently applied beyond its validated scope. Interpretation is further limited by assay heterogeneity, lack of standardisation, variable thresholds, reliance on surrogate outcomes, and the limited effectiveness of available interventions. Routine implementation therefore risks overdiagnosis, unnecessary interventions, and premature escalation to assisted reproduction without proven benefit. When applied selectively within an aetiology-driven framework, particularly in defined subgroups, SDF testing may provide adjunctive risk stratification rather than deterministic clinical guidance. All stakeholders must be made aware of these limitations before the test is offered, interpreted, or used to modify treatment.