{ ] Z¯ ハシu k Zy sZャキ ハタフ] 肝a { ハサチ ッM 澗ッYチ 翰Zサ` - SID

–
1384
3
2
.
1*
:
.
.
IVF
IVF
,
54
CO2
9
Ham'sF10
.
.
50
ive
100
(DMSO)
3
45
:
.
%95
37°C
DMSO
.
.
.
:
50
.
ROC
.
ch
IVF
IVF
(Exprimental)
of
18
.
D
4
SI
76 -81
:
50
10/5
Ar
.
IVF :
%15
.
:
. (1 )
40
.
-2
-3
(IVF)
20
-4
–
(ICSI)
.
- 1
0913 353 5129 :
Email: [email protected]
–
(IUI)
*
:
-
-
-3
-2 4
–
84/4/25:
84/3/25:
www.SID.ir
2
cut-off
ROC
129
10
1996
10
(5 )
30
.
Carver .
(2 )
25 15
IVF
.
.
IVF
IVF
(Seminal Analysis)
D
.
.
(2 )
.
SI
.
. (3 )
IVF
.
.
.
1383
56
.
.
Ar
2
. (2 )
1382
Exprimental
ch
.
ive
of
in vitro in vivo
7
SA
.
.
IVF
IVF
(Liquefaction)
.
37º C
45
30
Ham’sF10
10
.
400g
600 l
CO2 37º
C
(4 )
IVF
in vivo
(Capacitation)
.
.
%95
.
200 l
1994
Calvo .
200 l
1384
IVF
232
–
www.SID.ir
2
.
.
.
SPSS
.
(Correlation)
.(Pearson Correlation)
50
.
1 l/ml
DMSO
.
50
HCG HMG
.
200
.
l
ROC
D
.
50
(Acrosome Reaction=AR)
(AR-control)
50
.(1
( p<0.05)
)
5
50
DMSO
)
ch
.(1
50
(
-
37
3
200
)
0/8
0.1M
.(2
) (p<0.05)
10
-1
10
37º C
-2
-3
20
)
.
.
)
22º C
(
l
500g
:
10
CO2
30
.
0/8
PH=1.8
DMSO
50
.
.
(
Ar
50
.
.
ive
(AR-FF50)
of
(AR-DMSO)
.
SI
18
PH=5.3
-4
-5
10
(Receiving Operating Characteristics) ROC
1
cut-off
10 /5
45
.
2
%45
.
cut-off
.
1384
.
(Double blind)
100
ART
–
www.SID.ir
www.SID.ir
ive
ch
Ar
of
SI
D
2
:1
P Value
(Pearson correlation)
-
0/589
(P<0.05)+
0/041
Range
SD
± Mean
0-54 25/66 ± 13/49 AR-DMSO(%)
0-48 11/82 ± 12/18 AR-FF50(%)
1
2
2:
FR>50%
n=40
Range
SD ± Mean
P<0.05
6/14 ± 7/86
0-22
13/86 ± 12/88
0-48
-
23/96 ± 17/7
0-54
6/27 ± 11/84
9-51
DMSO
=
= DMSO
.
*
DMSO
SI
+
D
FR=<50%
n=14
Range
SD ± Mean
-
1
2
**
-
*
**
80
.
of
70
60
(6 )
50
in vivo
.
(round-headed)
ZP
ch
. (7 )
40
ive
IVF
6 9 .7 4
30
20
5 4 .4 9
4 4 .9 1
10
0
AR - c o n tr o l
AR - D M S O
AR -F F 5 0
.
Ar
:1
DMSO
.
ZP
A23187
. (8 )
.
.
(SA)
. (9 )
1384
(sperm function test)
–
www.SID.ir
2
10
cut-off
%50
cut-off
. ( r=0/68)
30
20
(Capacitation)
.(10)
Krausz
10
.( r=0/31)
50
Pampiglione 1993
.( r=0/34)
cut-off
Cummins
10
cut-off
.
50
:
.
50
-1
50
.(P<0.05)
-2
ROC
(
45
cut-off
.
(...
2000
Ar
ch
ive
)
.
A23187
.
(4 )
)
Baldi
(11)
Baker Liu
Parinaud
cut-off
1991
2002
of
20
.
1995
2002
D
%31
117
(1991) Cummins (1994)
54
IVF
IVF
.(.p<0.05)
Calvo
SI
IVF
cut-off
10/5
10/5
Oehinger .
%45
.
.
:
.
1996
Carver
IVF
.
References
1384
–
www.SID.ir
2
1. Quinn P, Jouannet P, Frydman R, Van
Steirteghem, A. C, Wolf, J. P, Czyglik, F, Van
der Abbeel, E. Infertility , a comprehensive text;
ionophore- Induced acrosome reaction. 2005
Feb: 20 (2): 469-75.
9. Cummins JM, Pember SM, Jequier AM,Yovich
2nd ed; Seibel, Machelle, M., Eds, 1997.
Yovich JL, Hartmann PE. A test of the human
Appleton & Lange: Stamford, 793-807.
sperm acrosome reaction following ionophore
2. Liu and Baker, Evaluation and assessment of
challenge relationship to fertility and other
semen for IVF/ICSI, Asian Androl, 2002 Dec 4;
seminal parameters, J Androl. 1991 Mar-
281-285.
Apr:12(2):98-103.
3. Coetzee, T.E., Check, J.H., Choe, J., An
10. Ceinwen, Artificial inducation of the acrosome
reaction
in vitro. Hum. Reprod., 1992 7, 978-981.
Reproduction, 1994, Vol 9, 77-82.
function assays and their predictive value for
fertilization outcome in IVF therapy: a meta
analysis. Human Repraduction update.2000,
spermatozoa,
Human
11. Baldi E, Luconi M, Bonaccorsi L, Forto G.
Signal
transduction
pathways
in
human
spermatozoa, J Reprod Immunol 2002 Jan:
53(1-2): 121-31.
12. Carver-Ward J.A., Hollanders J.M.G. High
Vol. 6 No.2, 160-168.
reaction
prediction
by
flow
cykometric
predicts
analysis of the CD46 antigen on the inner
vitro fertilization,
acrosomal membrane of spermatozoa. Hrtna.
inducibility
fertilization success at in
fertilization
of
5. Calvo L, Dennison–Lagos L, Banks, S.M.
Acrosome
human
SI
4. Oehninger S.,Franken D., Saged E., Sperm
in
D
evaluation of couples with failure of fertilization
Hum. Reprod. 1994 9, 1880 – 1886.
Repral, 1996 Tl, 1923-1928.
13. Krausz C, Bcxtaccorsi L. Two functional
selected sperm parameters for classical invitro
assays of sperm responsiveness to progesterone
fertilization procedure of oocyte fertilization.
and their predictive values in in
2005 Andrologia. Vol. 37 Issue 2-3: 72.
fertilization. Hum. Reprod., 1996 11, 1661 –
ch
ive
6. Jedrzeiczak P, Powelezyk L. Predictive value of
7. Franken DR., Bastiaan HS and Oehninger SC.
vitro
1667.
14. Pampiglione J.S, Tan S. and Campbell S. The
in human sperm: validation of a micro assay
use of the stimulated acrosome reaction test as a
Ar
Physiological induction of the acrosome reaction
using minimal volumes of solubilized,homologous
test of fertilizing ability in human spermatozoa.
zona pellucida, J Assist Reprod Genet, Aug
Fertil. Stril, (1993)59, 1280 – 1284.
15. Parinaud J, Vietez G, Moutaffian H, Richoilley
2000 17(7): 374-8.
8. Katsuki T, Hava T, Ueda K, Tanaka J, Ohema
K.
Prediction
reproduction
of
outcomes
treatment
using
G, Labal B. Variations in spontaneous and
of
assisted
induced acrosome reaction: correlation with
the
calcium
semen
parameters
and
in-vitro
fertilization
results. Hum reprod 1995 Aug:10(8):2085-9.
1384
–
www.SID.ir
Ar
ch
ive
of
SI
D
2
1384
–
www.SID.ir