- Sare Ashourzadeh
 - - Infertility Research and Clinical Center, Shahid Sadoughi Medical Sciences University, Yazd, Iran
- Azam Agha-Rahimi
- - Infertility Research and Clinical Center, Shahid Sadoughi Medical Sciences University, Yazd, Iran
- Mohammad Ali Khalili
- - Infertility Research and Clinical Center, Shahid Sadoughi Medical Sciences University, Yazd, Iran
Received: 8/14/2010 Accepted: 12/18/2010 - Publisher : Avicenna Research Institute |
|
| Related Articles |
|
| Other Format |
|
|
|
Abstract
Background: ART laboratories are quality controlled to make sure that disposable objects used for the culture of gametes and embryos are toxin-free. To maintain a high standard, all disposable objects in our ART laboratory were tested by human sperm motility assay (HuSMA). HuSMA was used as a measure for QC at the intended ART laboratory. Methods: Eighteen objects that are commonly used in IVF laboratories were tested by HuSMA. The objects included gloves, syringes, culture dishes, pipettes, tips and semen collection dishes. HuSMA was conducted at 10 and 30 minutes and also at 1, 2, 4, and 24 hours of incubation at room temperature. Sperm motility index (SMI) was calculated by dividing the percentage of progressive motile sperms of the test by that of the control at the specified intervals. An SMI value < 0.85 was defined to indicate sperm toxicity. The tests were repeated for three times. Results: QC by HuSMA confirmed the toxicity of three objects, including embryo transfer (ET) gloves A and B, and puncture gloves A. ET gloves A (SMI=0.0) and puncture gloves A (SMI=0.0) were toxic after 10 minutes, but ET gloves B (SMI=0.63) were shown to be toxic after 24 hours (46% progressive motile sperm compared with 68% in the control group). Moreover, two other objects including culture dish (SMI=0.42) and semen collection dish (SMI=0.67) had borderline values after 24 hours; different results in four repeats after 24 hours (twice toxic and twice nontoxic). Conclusion: Some objects which are routinely used in ART laboratories may be toxic and their use should be discontinued as part of QC programs. To increase the efficiency of HuSMA, it seems necessary to do this test more than once for each object.
Keywords:
ART, Human, Laboratory, Quality control, Sperm motility, Toxicity tests To cite this article:References
- Parinaud J, Reme JM, Monrozies X, Favrin S, Sarramon MF, Pontonnier G. Mouse system quality control is necessary before the use of new material for in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf. 1987;4(1):56-8.
- Castilla JA, de Assín RR, Gonzalvo MC, Clavero A, Ramírez JP, Vergara F, et al. External quality control for embryology laboratories. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010;20(1):68-74.
- De Jonge CJ, Centola GM, Reed ML, Shabanowitz RB, Simon SD, Quinn P. Human sperm survival assay as a bioassay for the assisted reproductive technologies laboratory. J Androl. 2003;24(1):16-8.
- Gardner DK. In vitro fertilization: a practical approach. 1st ed. New York: Informa Healthcare;2007. p. 365-7.
- Lierman S, De Sutter P, Dhont M, Van der Elst J. Double-quality control reveals high-level toxicity in gloves used for operator protection in assisted reproductive technology. Fertil Steril. 2007;88(4 Suppl): 1266-72.
- Quinn P, Warnes GM, Kerin JF, Kirby C. Culture factors in relation to the success of human in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 1984; 41(2):202-9.
- Ackerman S, Swanson RJ, Stokes G, Veeck L. Culture of preimplantation mouse embryos as a quality control assay for human in vitro fertilization. Gamete Res. 1984;9:145-52.
- Fleming TP, Pratt HP, Braude PR. The use of mouse preimplantation embryos for quality control of culture reagents in human in vitro fertilization programs: a cautionary note. Fertil Steril. 1987;47(5): 858-60.
- Bertheussen K, Holst N, Forsdahl F, Høie KE. A new cell culture assay for quality control in IVF. Hum Reprod. 1989;4(5):531-5.
- Ray BD, McDermott A, Wardle PG, Corrigan E, Mitchell JD, McLaughlin EA, et al. In vitro fertilization: fertilization failure due to toxic catheters. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf. 1987;4(1):58-61.
- Edwards RG, Steptoe PC, Purdy JM. Establishing full-term human pregnancies using cleaving embryos grown in vitro. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1980; 87(9):737-56.
- Critchlow JD, Matson PL, Newman MC, Horne G, Troup SA, Lieberman BA. Quality control in an invitro fertilization laboratory: use of human sperm survival studies. Hum Reprod. 1989;4(5):545-9.
- Hafez ESE, Hafez SD. Atlas of clinical andrology. 1st ed. London: Taylor & Francis Group; 2005. p, 187-8.
- Bavister BD, Andrews JC. A rapid sperm motility bioassay procedure for quality-control testing of water and culture media. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf. 1988;5(2):67-75.
- Davidson A, Vermesh M, Lobo RA, Paulson RJ. Mouse embryo culture as quality control for human in vitro fertilization: the one-cell versus the two-cell model. Fertil Steril. 1988;49(3):516-21.
- Esterhuizen AD, Bosman E, Botes AD, Groenewald OA, Giesteira MV, Labuschagne GP, et al. A comparative study on the diagnostic sensitivity of rodent sperm and embryos in the detection of endotoxin in Earle's balanced salt solution. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1994;11(1):38-42.
- McDowell JS, Swanson RJ, Maloney M, Veeck L. Mouse embryo quality control for toxicity determination in the Norfolk in vitro fertilization program. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf. 1988;5(3): 144-8.
- Morimoto Y, Hayashi E, Ohno T, Kawata A, Horikoshi Y, Kanzaki H. Quality control of human IVF/ ICSI program using endotoxin measurement and sperm survival test. Hum Cell. 1997;10(4): 271-6.
- Quinn P, Horstman FC. Is the mouse a good model for the human with respect to the development of the preimplantation embryo in vitro?. Hum Reprod. 1998;13 Suppl 4:173-83.
- Van den Abbeel E, Vitrier S, Lebrun F, Bertrand E, Devrecker F, Englert Y. Optimized mouse bioassays for the detection of embryology contaminants. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(114):O-205.
- Claassens OE, Wehr JB, Harrison KL. Optimizing sensitivity of the human sperm motility assay for embryo toxicity testing. Hum Reprod. 2000;15(7): 1586-91.