Evaluation of Sperm DNA Fragmentation Using Two Different Methods: TUNEL Via Fluorescence Microscopy, and Flow Cytometry

Overview

Journal Medicina (Kaunas)

Publisher MDPI

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2023 Jul 29

PMID 37512124

Authors

Katerina Chatzimeletiou

Alexandra Fleva

Theodoros-Thomas Nikolopoulos

Maria Markopoulou

Glykeria Zervakakou

Kyriakos Papanikolaou

George Anifandis

Anastasia Gianakou

Grigoris Grimbizis

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

: Sperm DNA fragmentation refers to any break in one or both of the strands of DNA in the head of a sperm. The most widely used methodologies for assessing sperm DNA fragmentation are the sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA), the sperm chromatin dispersion assay (SCD), the single-cell gel electrophoresis assay (SCGE-comet), and the terminal-deoxynucleotidyl-transferase (TdT)-mediated dUTP nick end labelling (TUNEL) assay. The aim of this study was to compare the efficiency and sensitivity of the analysis of sperm DNA fragmentation using TUNEL via fluorescence microscopy, and flow cytometry. : Semen samples were collected and analyzed for standard characteristics using light microscopy, and for sperm DNA fragmentation using both TUNEL via fluorescence microscopy, and flow cytometry. There were no significant differences in the values of the sperm DNA fragmentation index (DFI) obtained when the analysis was performed using TUNEL or flow cytometry ( = 0.543). Spearman's correlation analysis revealed a significant negative correlation between sperm motility (%) and sperm DNA fragmentation ( < 0.01), as well as between sperm concentration and sperm DNA fragmentation ( < 0.05). The Mann-Whitney U test showed no significant difference in the DFI among couples with repeated implantation failure (RIF) and miscarriages ( = 0.352). Both methods (TUNEL via fluorescence microscopy, and flow cytometry) have a high efficiency and sensitivity in accurately detecting sperm DNA fragmentation, and can be effectively used to assess male fertility.

Citing Articles

Emerging trends in sperm selection: enhancing success rates in assisted reproduction.

Zhang X, Chao S, Ye N, Ouyang D Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2024; 22(1):67.

PMID: 38877490 PMC: 11177495. DOI: 10.1186/s12958-024-01239-1.

Innovative technology for evaluation of sperm DNA double-strand breaks diagnoses male factor infertility and prevents reproductive failures.

Wang T, Lee C, Huang C, Tsao H, Chang H, Chang L Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):18996.

PMID: 37923811 PMC: 10624885. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-46049-4.

References

Aitken R . The changing tide of human fertility. Hum Reprod. 2022; 37(4):629-638. PMC: 8977063. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deac011. View

Cooper T, Noonan E, von Eckardstein S, Auger J, Baker H, Behre H . World Health Organization reference values for human semen characteristics. Hum Reprod Update. 2009; 16(3):231-45. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmp048. View

Barbagallo F, Cannarella R, Crafa A, Manna C, La Vignera S, Condorelli R . The Impact of a Very Short Abstinence Period on Conventional Sperm Parameters and Sperm DNA Fragmentation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Clin Med. 2022; 11(24). PMC: 9782170. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11247303. View

Baldi E, Tamburrino L, Muratori M, DeglInnocenti S, Marchiani S . Adverse effects of in vitro manipulation of spermatozoa. Anim Reprod Sci. 2020; 220:106314. DOI: 10.1016/j.anireprosci.2020.106314. View

Bjorndahl L, Barratt C, Mortimer D, Agarwal A, Aitken R, Alvarez J . Standards in semen examination: publishing reproducible and reliable data based on high-quality methodology. Hum Reprod. 2022; 37(11):2497-2502. PMC: 9627864. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deac189. View

Chatzimeletiou K, Morrison E, Prapas N, Prapas Y, Handyside A . The centrosome and early embryogenesis: clinical insights. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008; 16(4):485-91. DOI: 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60455-5. View

Muratori M, Tamburrino L, Marchiani S, Cambi M, Olivito B, Azzari C . Investigation on the Origin of Sperm DNA Fragmentation: Role of Apoptosis, Immaturity and Oxidative Stress. Mol Med. 2015; 21:109-22. PMC: 4461587. DOI: 10.2119/molmed.2014.00158. View

Agarwal A, Baskaran S, Parekh N, Cho C, Henkel R, Vij S . Male infertility. Lancet. 2020; 397(10271):319-333. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32667-2. View

Sharma R, Iovine C, Agarwal A, Henkel R . TUNEL assay-Standardized method for testing sperm DNA fragmentation. Andrologia. 2020; 53(2):e13738. DOI: 10.1111/and.13738. View

10.

Zini A, Boman J, Belzile E, Ciampi A . Sperm DNA damage is associated with an increased risk of pregnancy loss after IVF and ICSI: systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2008; 23(12):2663-8. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/den321. View

11.

Evenson D, Djira G, Kasperson K, Christianson J . Relationships between the age of 25,445 men attending infertility clinics and sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA®) defined sperm DNA and chromatin integrity. Fertil Steril. 2020; 114(2):311-320. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.03.028. View

12.

Ammar O, Mehdi M, Muratori M . Teratozoospermia: Its association with sperm DNA defects, apoptotic alterations, and oxidative stress. Andrology. 2020; 8(5):1095-1106. DOI: 10.1111/andr.12778. View

13.

Moskovtsev S, Jarvi K, Mullen J, Cadesky K, Hannam T, Lo K . Testicular spermatozoa have statistically significantly lower DNA damage compared with ejaculated spermatozoa in patients with unsuccessful oral antioxidant treatment. Fertil Steril. 2008; 93(4):1142-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.11.005. View

14.

Jerre E, Bungum M, Evenson D, Giwercman A . Sperm chromatin structure assay high DNA stainability sperm as a marker of early miscarriage after intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril. 2019; 112(1):46-53.e2. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.03.013. View

15.

Ammar O, Tekeya O, Hannachi I, Sallem A, Haouas Z, Mehdi M . Increased Sperm DNA Fragmentation in Infertile Men with Varicocele: Relationship with Apoptosis, Seminal Oxidative Stress, and Spermatic Parameters. Reprod Sci. 2020; 28(3):909-919. DOI: 10.1007/s43032-020-00311-6. View

16.

Evenson D . The Sperm Chromatin Structure Assay (SCSA(®)) and other sperm DNA fragmentation tests for evaluation of sperm nuclear DNA integrity as related to fertility. Anim Reprod Sci. 2016; 169:56-75. DOI: 10.1016/j.anireprosci.2016.01.017. View

17.

Levek-Motola N, Soffer Y, Shochat L, Raziel A, Lewin L, Golan R . Flow cytometry of human semen: a preliminary study of a non-invasive method for the detection of spermatogenetic defects. Hum Reprod. 2005; 20(12):3469-75. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dei247. View

18.

Chatzimeletiou K, Sioga A, Oikonomou L, Charalampidou S, Kantartzi P, Zournatzi V . Semen analysis by electron and fluorescence microscopy in a case of partial hydatidiform mole reveals a high incidence of abnormal morphology, diploidy, and tetraploidy. Fertil Steril. 2011; 95(7):2430.e1-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.01.161. View

19.

Esbert M, Pacheco A, Soares S, Amoros D, Florensa M, Ballesteros A . High sperm DNA fragmentation delays human embryo kinetics when oocytes from young and healthy donors are microinjected. Andrology. 2018; 6(5):697-706. DOI: 10.1111/andr.12551. View

20.

Newman H, Catt S, Vining B, Vollenhoven B, Horta F . DNA repair and response to sperm DNA damage in oocytes and embryos, and the potential consequences in ART: a systematic review. Mol Hum Reprod. 2021; 28(1). DOI: 10.1093/molehr/gaab071. View