首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Asian Journal of Andrology >A comparison of conventional and computer-assisted semen analysis (CRISMAS software) using samples from 166 young Danish men
【2h】

A comparison of conventional and computer-assisted semen analysis (CRISMAS software) using samples from 166 young Danish men

机译:使用来自166名丹麦年轻人的样本比较常规和计算机辅助精液分析(CRISMAS软件)

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The aim of the present study was to compare assessments of sperm concentration and sperm motility analysed by conventional semen analysis with those obtained by computer-assisted semen analysis (CASA) (Copenhagen Rigshospitalet Image House Sperm Motility Analysis System (CRISMAS) 4.6 software) using semen samples from 166 young Danish men. The CRISMAS software identifies sperm concentration and classifies spermatozoa into three motility categories. To enable comparison of the two methods, the four motility stages obtained by conventional semen analysis were, based on their velocity classifications, divided into three stages, comparable to the three CRISMAS motility categories: rapidly progressive (A), slowly progressive (B) and non-progressive (C+D). Differences between the two methods were large for all investigated parameters (P<0.001). CRISMAS overestimated sperm concentration and the proportion of rapidly progressive spermatozoa and, consequently, underestimated the percentages of slowly progressive and non-progressive spermatozoa, compared to the conventional method. To investigate whether results drifted according to time of semen analysis, results were pooled into quarters according to date of semen analysis. CRISMAS motility results appeared more stable over time compared to the conventional analysis; however, neither method showed any trends. Apparently, CRISMAS CASA results and results from the conventional method were not comparable with respect to sperm concentration and motility analysis. This needs to be accounted for in clinics using this software and in studies of determinants of these semen characteristics.
机译:本研究的目的是比较使用常规精液分析和计算机辅助精液分析(CASA)(哥本哈根Rigshospitalet Image House精子活力分析系统(CRISMAS)4.6软件)获得的精子浓度和精子活力评估。 166位丹麦年轻人的样本。 CRISMAS软件可识别精子浓度并将精子分为三个运动类别。为了能够比较这两种方法,通过常规精液分析将其四个运动阶段根据其速度分类分为三个阶段,可与三个CRISMAS运动类别相媲美:快速进行性(A),缓慢进行性(B)和运动性(B)。非渐进式(C + D)。对于所有研究的参数,两种方法之间的差异都很大(P <0.001)。与传统方法相比,CRISMAS高估了精子浓度和快速进展性精子的比例,因此低估了缓慢进展性和非渐进性精子的百分比。为了调查结果是否根据精液分析时间而漂移,根据精液分析的日期将结果汇总为四分之一。与常规分析相比,CRISMAS运动结果随着时间的推移显得更加稳定。但是,两种方法都没有显示任何趋势。显然,就精子浓度和活力分析而言,CRISMAS CASA结果与常规方法得出的结果不具有可比性。这需要在使用该软件的诊所中以及在研究这些精液特征的决定因素时加以考虑。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号