P–103 Novel sperm preparation techniques compared with conventional preparation method

Abstract Study question Which sperm preparation technique separate the best quality sperm? Summary answer Microfluidic method improved the sperm parameters and decreased sperm DNA damage. What is known already About 40% of infertility issues are due to male factor. One of the known causes of male infertility is associated with low sperm parameters and high level DNA fragmentation. Sperm preparation techniques in ICSI procedures is used in order to obtain the best-quality sperm. Study design, size, duration The present study was designed to compare Microfluidic, Zeta potential, Magnetic Activated Cell Sorting (MACS) and Swim-up methods for sperm preparation and the effect of these methods on semen parameters and sperm DNA integrity in infertile men (n = 25) with a mean age of 38. Participants/materials, setting, methods In this study, each sample was divided into 4 groups, one part for preparing by Microfluidic method, one of them for preparing by Swim -up method, the other one was prepared by MACS and the last one was prepared by zeta potential. Then sperm count, viability, motility and morphology were assessed according to WHO 2010. DNA damage were assessed by Sperm DNA Fragmentation assay and sperm chromatin packaging assessed by CMA3 staining test Main results and the role of chance Sperm parameters including viability, motility, and morphology in the Microfluidic method were significantly improved and sperm DNA damage were significantly lower than three other methods (P-value <0.05). The sperm parameters and sperm DNA damage after preparation by MACS and Zeta potential methods were not significantly different however in the Swim-up method sperm parameters were lower than three other methods (P-value <0.05). Limitations, reasons for caution The fertilization and pregnancy rate of the resulting embryos are not available. Wider implications of the findings: Our results showed that Microfluidic can be an effective way to improve sperm quality of infertile male compared to conventional preparation methods. We also found instead of the MACS method, we can use the Zeta potential method according to their costs, for sperm preparation during ART cycle. Trial registration number *