ArticleBasic and clinical andrology2024
SARS-CoV-2 in semen: a multicenter prospective study and literature review.
Article in Basic and clinical andrology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite numerous efforts to demonstrate the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 in semen of affected males, no clear evidence exists. We conducted a multicenter prospective study on adult patients with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 including patients with active infection (Active Group) and with a history of COVID-19 disease at least of 6 months (Recovered Group). An RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 and a semen analysis were performed on the semen of the enrolled patients. Genital/sexual symptoms were investigated in both groups. In the active infection group, urinary and sexual functions were assessed in the active phase and after 6 months. Finally, the literature on the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in semen was reviewed non-systematically.
resultsSixty-five patients were enrolled (Active Group = 15, Recovered Group = 50). RT-PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 found no trace of the virus in any of the semen samples. Genital/sexual symptoms during the active phase were reported in 8 (12.2%) patients. No statistically significant differences in semen quality were found between the two groups. IPSS and IIEF-5 scores did not change significantly during the different phases of infection about (p > 0.05).
conclusionsSARS-CoV-2 was not detected in semen of acute or recovered cases. Sperm parameters were not significantly different in the two groups. Urinary and erectile functions appeared stable across the phases of infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.