BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the hyaluronic acid (HA) binding assay in the selection of motile spermatozoa with normal morphology at high magnification (8400x). METHODS: A total of 16592 prepared spermatozoa were selected and classified into two groups: Group I, spermatozoa which presented their head attached to an HA substance (HA-bound sperm), and Group II, those spermatozoa that did not attach to the HA substance (HA-unbound sperm). HA-bound and HA-unbound spermatozoa were evaluated according to the following sperm forms: 1-Normal morphology: normal nucleus (smooth, symmetric and oval configuration, length: 4.75+/-2.8 μm and width: 3.28+/-0.20 μm, no extrusion or invagination and no vacuoles occupied more than 4% of the nuclear area) as well as acrosome, post-acrosomal lamina, neck, tail, besides not presenting a cytoplasmic droplet or cytoplasm around the head; 2-Abnormalities of nuclear form (a-Large/small; b-Wide/narrow; c-Regional disorder); 3-Abnormalities of nuclear chromatin content (a-Vacuoles: occupy >4% to 50% of the nuclear area and b-Large vacuoles: occupy >50% of the nuclear area) using a high magnification (8400x) microscopy system. RESULTS: No significant differences were obtained with respect to sperm morphological forms and the groups HA-bound and HA-unbound. 1-Normal morphology: HA-bound 2.7% and HA-unbound 2.5% (P = 0.56). 2-Abnormalities of nuclear form: a-Large/small: HA-bound 1.6% vs. HA-unbound 1.6% (P = 0.63); b-Wide/narrow: HA-bound 3.1% vs. HA-unbound 2.7% (P = 0.13); c-Regional disorders: HA-bound 4.7% vs. HA-unbound 4.4% (P = 0.34). 3. Abnormalities of nuclear chromatin content: a-Vacuoles >4% to 50%: HA-bound 72.2% vs. HA-unbound 72.5% (P = 0.74); b-Large vacuoles: HA-bound 15.7% vs. HA-unbound 16.3% (P = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that HA binding assay has limited efficacy in selecting motile spermatozoa with normal morphology at high magnification.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Petersen et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: