353 : Microfluidic Preparation of Spermatozoa: A Potential Approach in Assisted Reproductive Technology

• Published in: Fertility & reproduction Vol. 5; no. 4; p. 440
• Main Authors: Ho, Nguyet Minh, Do, Thuy Huong, Ho, Sy Hung, Nguyen, Manh Ha
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: World Scientific Publishing Company 01-12-2023; World Scientific Publishing
• Subjects: density gradient centrifugation, microfluidic, DFI; ORAL PRESENTATION: ART, Laboratory; density gradient centrifugation, microfluidic, DFI
• ISSN: 2661-3182; 2661-3174
• DOI: 10.1142/S2661318223742182

Background and Aims: While density gradient centrifugation (DGC) is a conventional method in sperm preparation, this method can induce reactive oxygen species (ROS) which cause sperm dysfunction, sperm DNA damage, a recent advancement in sperm processing using microfluidic system is believed to reduce damage and to select the good quality sperm. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of sperm preparation between DGC method and microfluidic system.
Method: 30 semen samples were separated into 2 equal small samples, each sample was processed by DGC methods (control) and microfluidic (intervention) respectively. Pre- and post processing parameters was evaluated according to WHO-2010 and the DNA fragmentation index (DFI) was determined by flow cytometry technique.
Results: The result showed that DFI values from the microfluidic preparation (0.67 ± 0.53%) was significantly lower than that of the DCG group (1.18 ± 13.73%). In particular, for semen samples with high DFI (>15%), the microfluidic system showed a noticeable reduction in DFI compared to the results from the DGC method. The progressive motile sperm recovery rate was higher in the intervention group (39.75 ± 19.20 vs 32.14 ± 18.14). Our data also showed that the vitality and mobility of sperm in the microfluidic group was higher than those of the DGC group (97.9 ± 2.21 vs 96.56 ± 4.11%, 96.36 ± 2.60 vs 95.06 ± 2.35%, respectively). However, there was no difference in sperm progressive motility and sperm morphology between two groups.
Conclusions: There were significant improvement in sperm DFI and progressive motility in the microfluidic system. With this result, microfluidic system is a potential approach to reduce DNA fragmentation for ICSI procedures.