ArticleAndrology2026
Comparison of Different Sperm Isolation Strategies for Fresh and Cryopreserved Human Spermatozoa Using a Simple Method for Simultaneously Assessing Sperm Vitality and DNA Fragmentation.
Article in Andrology, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study compares three different methods of sperm isolation using a novel laboratory test that permits the parallel assessment of vitality and DNA integrity in the same sperm cell.
methodsThree different sperm isolation procedures were compared including the electrophoretic Felix System, swim-up and density gradient centrifugation (DGC), each of which utilized a different separation principle comprising net charge, intrinsic motility and isopycnic density, respectively. These sperm isolation methods were also challenged with the more difficult task of isolating spermatozoa following cryopreservation, which compromises sperm vitality, motility and DNA integrity. To facilitate this comparison, a novel assessment technique was developed wherein a live/dead stain that formed covalent bonds with intracellular amines in non-viable spermatozoa was combined with the Sperm Chromatin Dispersal (SCD) assay for DNA integrity.
resultsOverall, Felix generated populations of spermatozoa that were superior to DGC (p < 0.001), and equivalent to swim-up, in terms of optimizing the proportion of 'live/DNA intact' cells and rejecting the 'dead/DNA intact' and 'dead/DNA damaged' subpopulations. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionsThe development of a novel method for the parallel assessment of vitality and DNA damage facilitated comparison of different sperm isolation techniques and may find applications in other areas of diagnostic andrology.
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.