Abstract
Purpose: We aimed to establish the influence of the parameters affecting artificial insemination (AI) results in order to describe the ideal situations to achieve the best results as well as to adequately counsel the patients undergoing these treatments about their pregnancy chances.
Methods: We performed a controlled retrospective clinical study over more than one decade in a total of 1858 cycles in 710 patients. Clinical histories and computer registers were systematically reviewed between January 1990 and June 2002. We analyzed the influence of diverse factors affecting AI results such as patient's age, ovarian stimulation, and seminal characteristics to offer a detailed description of the technique.
Results: Less than 35-years-old, smooth ovarian stimulation and 5 million of progressive motile sperm inseminated two consecutive days are the optimum conditions for achieving good results. Also, period of time that sperm remained frozen do not affect the result. Furthermore, we present the likely or expected outcomes of these treatments depending on the male and female etiologies.
Conclusions: We discourage AI in aged patients, and strongly recommend undergoing ovarian stimulation. Nonetheless, we must reach an adequate amount of sperm with good motility in order to inseminate with maximum guaranties of success.
Keywords: Age, artificial donor insemination, motile sperm, ovarian stimulation, retrospective
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (1,017.3 KB).
References
- 1.Meseguer M, Garrido N, Gimeno C, Simon C, Remohí J, Pellicer A. Comparison of polymerase chain reaction: Dependent methods for determining the presence of human immunodeficiency virus and Hepatitis C virus in washed semen. Fertil Steril. 2002;78(6):1199–1202. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(02)04275-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Garrido N, Zuzuarregui JL, Meseguer M, Simón C, Remohí J, Pellicer A. Sperm and oocyte donor selection and management: Experiences of 10 years follow-up over more than 2100 candidates. Human Reprod. 2002;17(12):3142–3148. doi: 10.1093/humrep/17.12.3142. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Meseguer M, Garrido N, Romero JL, Simón C, Remohí J, Pellicer A. Parameters affecting sperm survival after thawing in long-term frozen storage. Fertil Steril. 2001;76(Suppl):119. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Ballescá JL, Matorras R, Viscasillas P. Registro de inseminaciones (IAC-IAD). Sociedad Española de Fertilidad. Rev Iber Fertil. 2000;19(1):41–47. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Botchan A, Hauser R, Gamzu R, Yogev L, Paz G, Yavetz H. Results of 6139 artificial insemination cycles with donor spermatozoa. Hum Reprod. 2001;16(11):2298–2304. doi: 10.1093/humrep/16.11.2298. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Ombelet W, Puttemans P, Bosmans E. Intrauterine insemination: A first-step procedure in the algorithm of male subfertility treatment. Hum Reprod. 1995;10(Suppl1):90–102. doi: 10.1093/humrep/10.suppl_1.90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Depypere, HT, Gordts, S, Campo, R, Comhaire, F: Methods to increase the success rate of artificial insemination with donor semen. Hum Reprod 1994;(9):661-663 [DOI] [PubMed]
- 8.Williams RS, Alderman J. Predictors of success with donor sperm. Am J Obste Gynecol. 2001;185(2):332–337. doi: 10.1067/mob.2001.116733. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Matilsky, M, Geslevich, Y, Ben-Ami, M, Ben-Shlomo, I, Weiner-Megnagi, T, Shalev, E: Two-day IUI treatment cycles are more successful than one-day IUI cycles when using frozen-thawed donor sperm. J Androl 1998;(19):603-607 [PubMed]
- 10.Kovacs GT, Leeton JF, Mathews CD. The outcome of artificial donor insemination compared to the husbands fertility status. Clin Reprod Fertil. 1982;1:295–299. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Emperaire, JC, Gauzere-Soumireu, E, Audebert, AJM: Female fertility and donor insemination. Fertil Steril 1982;(1):90-93 [DOI] [PubMed]
- 12.Ferrara I, Balet B, Grudzinskas JG. Intrauterine insemination with frozen donor sperm. Pregnancy outcome in relation to age and ovarian stimulation regime. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(9):2320–2324. doi: 10.1093/humrep/17.9.2320. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]