P-782 The influence of microfluidic preparation of spermatozoa for ICSI (intracytoplasmic sperm injection) in an unselected IVF population on fertilization rate, embryo-quality and pregnancy rate
Authors: Huniadi C A , Zaha I , Liana S , Petronela N , Andrea S , Ioana R , Cosmina B , Miheala R 
Published: June 2023

Study question

Does the microfluidic technique as a new preparation option for sperm in ICSI during IVF have a better outcome in fertilization, blastocysts and pregnancy rate?

Summary answer

The patients that had the sperm preparation for ICSI with the microfluidic sperm selection had similar results as with the gradient centrifugation selection.

What is known already

Semen analysis is a poor predictor of the fertilization potential of spermatozoa and a male factor may contribute to poor outcomes of IVF procedure despite a normal semen analysis. Traditionally, sperm processing is accomplished by density gradient centrifugation or swim-up methods but this have been shown in some studies to increase reactive oxygen species and induce sperm DNA fragmentation. The microfluidic sperm selection (ZyMot- ICSI) is based on the selection of the spermatozoa with the lowest DNA fragmentation rate but studies do not prove better clinical outcomes after this method.

Study design, size, duration

This is a prospective randomized study carried out in a university level fertility clinic in Oradea, Romania from January 2022 to December 2022, including 239 patients in total. The patients that underwent IVF-ICSI procedures for various indications were randomized in two groups: the control group swim-up technique was used for sperm selection for ICSI during IVF and the study group with the ZyMot-ICSI (microfluidic sperm selection technique) was used.

Participants/materials, setting, methods

We conducted a prospective trial comparing 119 couples that were allocated to the classic swim-up technique (control group) and 120 couples that were allocated with the microfluidic technique was used (study group) in our university level clinic to go through IVF. Inclusion criteria were couples with known infertility requiring IVF and willing to participate in the study. Exclusion criteria were: severe oligoasthenospermia (concentration &lt; 5x10^6 spermatozoa/ml or motility &lt;10%), oocyte or sperm donation.

Main results and the role of chance

The statistical analysis showed that there is no significant difference between the fertilization rate (study vs control p = 0.37 with absolute difference -1.182, 95% CI (-7.2, 5.4)) or blastocyst rate (study vs control p = 0.88 with absolute difference -0.5 95% (-6.5, 6)) nor is there a difference in clinical pregnancy. Even if microfluidic preparation of spermatozoa did not seem to improve the results it may be utilized more broadly for standard IVF, intrauterine insemination and could also improve workflow, decrease intervention by laboratory personal and provide more consistent incubation conditions.

Limitations, reasons for caution

The population studied was inclusive with unselected IVF indications and did not attempt to isolate male factor infertility cases or patients with a history of elevated sperm DNA fragmentation.

Wider implications of the findings

Microfluidic sperm preparation performs similarly to density gradient centrifugation in sperm preparation for IVF in an unselected population.

Trial registration number

Not applicable