Journal of Andrology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Published-Ahead-of-Print April 4, 2007, DOI:10.2164/jandrol.106.001933

This Article
Right arrow Author Manuscript (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
28/4/600    most recent
Author Manuscript (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by ACHARD, V.
Right arrow Articles by GUICHAOUA, M. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by ACHARD, V.
Right arrow Articles by GUICHAOUA, M. R.

Reproductive failure in patients with various percentages of macronuclear spermatozoa: high level of aneuploid and polyploid spermatozoa

Vincent ACHARD , Odile PAULMYER-LACROIX , Georges MERCIER , Géraldine PORCU , Jacqueline SAIAS-MAGNAN , Catherine METZLER-GUILLEMAIN , and Marie Roberte GUICHAOUA *

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: mguichaoua{at}ap-hm.fr.

The aim of this study was to describe the association between various percentages of macronuclear spermatozoa, sperm chromosomal abnormalities and reproductive failure in four patients. One patient had a familial history of perinatal deaths. METHODS: Patients were selected according to the coexistence of normal sized and macronuclear sperm (19%, 22%, 29.5%, and 49.7%). Fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) on spermatozoa and semi-automated analysis of nuclear surface were assessed. RESULTS: All patients were characterized by an oligoasthenozoospermia. Three patients had a prevalence of irregular macronuclear spermatozoa and prevalence of nondisjunction at the first meiotic division. One patient had a prevalence of regular macronuclear spermatozoa and prevalence of nondisjunction at the second meiotic division. FISH also showed a high rate of polyploidy and various aneuploid sperm. The percentage of sperm with abnormal chromosome complements (25.6%, 43.6%, 51.4%, 71.7% with three colour FISH) was higher than that of macronuclear sperm suggesting that a population of apparently normal-sized spermatozoa that could be used for ICSI was aneuploid. By thresholding nuclear surfaces, we distinguished a shift toward elevated values or two sperm sub-populations, normal and macronuclear. Patients underwent seven ICSI cycles. The fertilization rate was low for three patients (50%, 40%, 50%) and normal for one patient (83.3%). Pregnancy rate per transfer was low (14.3%). CONCLUSION: The present study shows that the macronuclear phenotype can manifest a variety of clinical aspects resulting from either distinct genetic origins or environmental factors. It is also shown that mild rates of macronuclear spermatozoa impair fertility and constitute a risk of chromosomal abnormality for the embryos and a risk of perinatal death. We suggest conducting FISH on spermatozoa and genetic counselling for a couple when a mild rate of macronuclear spermatozoa is diagnosed in the male.


Key words: FISH • chromosomal abnormalities • macronuclear sperm • meiosis • nuclear surface






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2007 by The American Society of Andrology.