Yıl: 2014 Cilt: 1 Sayı: 1 Sayfa: 5-9
PİRİMER VE SEKONDER İNFERTİL HASTALARIN KLİNİK ÖZELLİKLERİ
SERVET GENÇDAL, DENİZ SATAR, EMRE DESTEGÜL, ORÇUN ÖZDEMİR, ADEM ALTUNKOL, NEVZAT CAN ŞENER
Amaç: Primer ve sekonder infertil olguların spermiyogram sonuçlarının ayrıntılı bir şekilde incelenmesi ve çıkan sonuçların literatür verileri eşliğinde değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmaya Kasım 2008 ile Aralık 2010 tarihleri arasında hastanemiz androloji laboratuvarında primer ve sekonder infertilite sebebi ile
Bulgular: Varikosel tanısı olan ve olmayan hastaların karşılaştırılmasında yaş, morfoloji (% normal), sperm konsantrasyonu, motilite total (A+B+C) (%), motilite A (%), motilite B (%), Total Progresif Motil Sperm Sayısı (TPMSS), baş (%) ve boyun (%) değerleri varikosel tanısı olmayan olgularda daha yüksek
Sonuç: Varikoselli olup olmamanın infertilite olması durumunda sperm parametrelerini etkilemediği gözlenmektedir. Spermogram sonuçları infertilite tipine,
Anahtar Kelimeler (Keywords): Varikosel, infertilite, sperm konsantrasyonu, motilite, morfoloji
CLINICAL FEATURES OF PATIENTS WITH PRIMARY AND SECONDARY INFERTILITY
Purpose: To investigate, in detail, the spermiogram results of cases with primary and secondary infertility and to evaluate the obtained results in light of the data from the literature.
Materials and Methods: A total of 942 cases that had spermiograms performed for primary and secondary infertility at our hospital’s andrology laboratory between November 2008 and December 2010 were included in the study. After the semen was liquefied, macroscopic and microscopic evaluations were performed. Microscopic evaluations involved the assessment of sperm concentration and motility and the evaluation of morphology according to the Kruger strict criteria, all of which were performed in accordance with the criteria of the World Health Organization (WHO). The motility of each sperm was scored according to four categories, which were: rapid forward motility (a), slow forward motility (b), non-progressive motility (c), and immotile (d). Comparison of the spermiogram results of cases with primary and secondary infertility was performed retrospectively according to age (years), volume (ml), sperm concentration (ml/106), total motility (A+B+C) (%), motility A (%), motility B (%), motility C (%), motility D (%), the Total Progressive Motile Sperm Count (TPMSC) and normal morphology (% normal) values. The characteristics of primary and secondary infertility in cases diagnosed with varicocele were also compared. All results were compared statistically.
Results: During the comparisons performed on patients with varicocele according to the type of infertility, no statistical differences were identified with regards to the evaluated parameters. Based on the comparisons performed according to the type of infertility, cases with secondary infertility had higher age, sperm concentration (ml/106), total motility (A+B+C) (%), motility A (%), motility B (%), TPMSC, and normal morphology (% normal) values compared to cases with primary infertility, while motility C (%) and motility D (%) values were higher in cases with primary infertility.
Conclusion: As expected, varicocele did not alter sperm parameters when infertility was present. Spermiogram results demonstrated various differences depending on the presence of varicocele, infertility type and many other factors.
Anahtar Kelimeler (Keywords): Varicocele, infertility, sperm concentration, morphology
Tam Metin 159