Skip to main content
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics logoLink to Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
. 2000 May;17(5):245–252. doi: 10.1023/A:1009402214820

The Effect of Patient and Semen Characteristics on Live Birth Rates Following Intrauterine Insemination: A Retrospective Study

Benjamin N Hendin 1,2, Tommaso Falcone 3, Jorge Hallak 1,2, David R Nelson 4, Sreenivas Vemullapalli 1, Jeffrey Goldberg 3, Anthony J Thomas Jr 2, Ashok Agarwal 1,2,5
PMCID: PMC3455202  PMID: 10976410

Abstract

Purpose: To identify characteristics of female patients andof semen that were associated with live birth followingintra-uterine insemination (IUI).

Methods: Retrospective review of medical and laboratoryresults from 533 women who underwent IUI with partner'ssperm from 1993 through 1995.

Results: Among 1728 cycles, 116 (6.7%) resulted in livedeliveries. Among the 38 patient and semen variablesanalyzed, only 3 were associated with successful IUI outcome:female age <37.7 years at the time of treatment (P = 0.02);the absence of any corrective pelvic surgery (P < 0.001);and postwash sperm motility (P = 0.006). Couples withnone of these three risk factors achieved per-cycle pregnancyrates of 12.4%. Women with two risk factors (age and pelvicsurgery) achieved per-cycle pregnancy rates of 4.6% whensperm had good postwash motility. No pregnancies wereachieved when low postwash motility was combined withany other risk factor.

Conclusions: Advanced female age, poor postwash spermmotility, and a history of corrective pelvic surgery aresignificant risk factors for poor IUI success rates. Poor postwashsperm motility in combination with either of these other tworisk factors resulted in no successful pregnancies.

Keywords: infertility—male, infertility—female, insemination—martificial, sperm motility, pregnancy rate

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (141.9 KB).

REFERENCES

  • 1.Ombelet W, Puttemans P, Bosmans E. Intrauterine insemination, tion: A first-step procedure in the algorithm of male subfertility treatment. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:90–102. doi: 10.1093/humrep/10.suppl_1.90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Allen NC, Herbert CM, 3d, Maxson WS, Rogers BJ, Diamond MP, Wentz AC. Intrauterine insemination: a critical review. Fertil Steril. 1985;44:569–580. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)48969-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Martinez AR, Bernardus RE, Vermeiden JP, Schoemaker J. Basic questions on intrauterine insemination: An update. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1993;48:811–828. doi: 10.1097/00006254-199312000-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Brasch JG, Rawlins R, Tarchala S, Radwanska E. The relationship between total motile sperm count and the success of intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril. 1994;62:150–154. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)56831-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Toner JP, Mossad H, Grow DR, Morshedi M, Swanson RJ, Oehninger S. Value of sperm morphology assessed by strict criteria for prediction of the outcome of artificial (intrauterine) insemination. Andrologia. 1995;27:143–148. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0272.1995.tb01085.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Grow D, Oehninger S. Strict criteria for the evaluation of human sperm morphology and its impact on assisted reproduction. Andrologia. 1995;27:325–333. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0272.1995.tb01367.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Burr RW, Siegberg R, Flaherty SP, Wang XJ, Matthews CD. The influence of sperm morphology and the number of motile sperm inseminated on the outcome of intrauterine insemination combined with mild ovarian stimulation. Fertil Steril. 1996;65:127–132. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)58039-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Matorras R, Corcostegui B, Perez C, Mandiola M, Mendoza R, Rodriguez-Escudero FJ. Sperm morphology analysis (strict criteria) in male infertility is not a prognostic factor in intrauterine insemination with husband's sperm. Fertil Steril. 1995;63:608–611. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)57434-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Huang HY, Lee CL, Lai YM, Chang MY, Wang HS, Chang SY, et al. The impact of the total motile sperm count on the success of intrauterine insemination with husband's spermatozoa. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1996;13:56–63. doi: 10.1007/BF02068871. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Campana A, Sakkas D, Stalberg A, Bianchi PG, Comte I, Pache T, et al. Intrauterine insemination: Evaluation of the results according to the woman's age’ sperm quality’ total sperm count per insemination and life table analysis. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:732–736. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019244. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Shekarriz M, Sharma RK, Thomas AJ, Jr, Agarwal A. Positive myeloperoxidase staining (Endtz test) as indicator of excessive reactive oxygen species formation in semen. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1995;12:70–74. doi: 10.1007/BF02211372. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Cressman BE, Pace-Owens S, Pliego JF, Wincek TJ, Kuehl TJ. Effect of sperm dose on pregnancy rate from intrauterine insemination: A retrospective analysis. Texas Med. 1996;92:74–79. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics are provided here courtesy of Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

RESOURCES