Minerva urologica e nefrologica = The Italian journal of urology and nephrology · 2007
Effect of short-term exposure to two hydrophilic-coated and one gel pre-lubricated urinary catheters on sperm vitality, motility and kinematics in vitro.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Auger J, Rihaoui R, François N, Eustache F
Аннотация
AIM: This study aimed to determine the in vitro effect of a short-term exposure to two hydrophilic-coated and one gel pre-lubricated urinary catheters on human sperm quality.
METHODS: Semen samples of various qualities were coincubated with each catheter for 5 min at 37 degrees C. The percentages of live and motile sperm with their kinematic characteristics were blindly assessed in control and treated samples at the end of the coincubation and 10 and 55 min later.
RESULTS: The three catheters had no effect on sperm vitality. Similarly, the lubricated catheter and one hydrophilic-coated catheter negligibly modulated sperm motility. In contrast, the other hydrophilic-coated catheter tested had a significant negative effect on sperm movement.
CONCLUSION: Further studies are warranted, the issue being especially relevant to the collection of spermatozoa in spinal cord diseased patients catheterizing themselves several times a day. In this population, compounds releasing from the catheter and accumulating in the urethra could be an additional factor contributing to the poor sperm quality.
METHODS: Semen samples of various qualities were coincubated with each catheter for 5 min at 37 degrees C. The percentages of live and motile sperm with their kinematic characteristics were blindly assessed in control and treated samples at the end of the coincubation and 10 and 55 min later.
RESULTS: The three catheters had no effect on sperm vitality. Similarly, the lubricated catheter and one hydrophilic-coated catheter negligibly modulated sperm motility. In contrast, the other hydrophilic-coated catheter tested had a significant negative effect on sperm movement.
CONCLUSION: Further studies are warranted, the issue being especially relevant to the collection of spermatozoa in spinal cord diseased patients catheterizing themselves several times a day. In this population, compounds releasing from the catheter and accumulating in the urethra could be an additional factor contributing to the poor sperm quality.