Title of article :
Accuracy Evaluation of The Depth of Six Kinds of Sperm Counting Chambers for both Manual and Computer-Aided Semen Analyses
Author/Authors :
Lu، Jin-Chun نويسنده Department of Laboratory Medicine, Nanjing Hospital, Jiangsu Corps, the Armed Police Force, PLA, Nanjing 210028, Jiangsu, China , , Yue، Ru-Qian نويسنده Geoffrey Laboratory for Semen Analysis, Jiangsu Jingcheng Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd., Nanjing 210036, Jiangsu, China , , Feng، Rui-Xiang نويسنده Department of Laboratory Medicine, Nanjing Hospital, Jiangsu Corps, the Armed Police Force, PLA, Nanjing 210028, Jiangsu, China , , Kong، Ling-Zhu نويسنده Geoffrey Laboratory for Semen Analysis, Jiangsu Jingcheng Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd., Nanjing 210036, Jiangsu, China , , Xu، Yuan-Cheng نويسنده Geoffrey Laboratory for Semen Analysis, Jiangsu Jingcheng Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd., Nanjing 210036, Jiangsu, China ,
Issue Information :
فصلنامه با شماره پیاپی 36 سال 2016
Abstract :
Background: Although the depth of the counting chamber is an important factor influencing
sperm counting, no research has yet been reported on the measurement and comparison
of the depth of the chamber. We measured the exact depths of six kinds of sperm
counting chambers and evaluated their accuracy.
Materials and Methods: In this prospective study, the depths of six kinds of sperm
counting chambers for both manual and computer-aided semen analyses, including Makler
(n=24), Macro (n=32), Geoffrey (n=34), GoldCyto (n=20), Leja (n=20) and Cell-VU
(n=20), were measured with the Filmetrics F20 Spectral Reflectance Thin-Film Measurement
System, then the mean depth, the range and the coefficient of variation (CV) of
each chamber, and the mean depth, relative deviation and acceptability of each kind of
chamber were calculated by the closeness to the nominal value. Among the 24 Makler
chambers, 5 were new and 19 were used, and the other five kinds were all new chambers.
Results: The depths (mean ± SD, ?m) of Makler (new), Macro and Geoffrey chambers
were 11.07 ± 0.41, 10.19 ± 0.48 and 10.00 ± 0.28, respectively, while those of GoldCyto,
Leja and Cell-VU chambers were 23.76 ± 2.15, 20.49 ± 0.22 and 24.22 ± 2.58, respectively.
The acceptability of Geoffrey chambers was the highest (94.12%), followed by
Macro (65.63%), Leja (35%) and Makler (20%), while that of the other two kinds and
the used Makler chamber was zero.
Conclusion: There existed some difference between the actual depth and the corresponding
nominal value for sperm counting chambers, and the overall acceptability was very low. Moreover,
the abrasion caused by the long use, as of Makler chamber, for example, may result in unacceptability
of the chamber. In order to ensure the accuracy and repeatability of sperm concentration
results, the depth of the sperm counting chamber must be checked regularly.
Journal title :
International Journal of Fertility and Sterility
Journal title :
International Journal of Fertility and Sterility