title: Comparison of Cryopreserved Human Sperm between Ultra Rapid Freezing and Slow Programmable Freezing: Effect on Motility, Morphology and DNA Integrity.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Cryopreservation of sperm is common methods to preserve male fertility. Sperm freezing, suggest slow programmable freezing caused lower change of sperm morphology than sperm freezing in vapor of liquid nitrogen. Ultra rapid freezing is easy to be worked on, less time, low cost and does not need high experience.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To compare the effect on sperm motility, morphology and DNA integrity of post-thawed sperm after ultra rapid freezing and slow programmable freezing methods.
  
  
  METHODS
  Experimental study at laboratory of infertility unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital. Thirty-seven semen samples with normal semen analysis according to World Health Organization (WHO) 1999 [normal sperm volume ( 2 ml) and normal sperm concentration (≥ 20 x10(6)/ml) and sperm motility (≥ 50%)]. Semen samples were washed. Then each semen sample was divided into six cryovials. Two cryovials, 0.5 ml each, were cryopreserved by slow programmable freezing. Four 0.25 ml containing cryovials, were cryopreserved by ultra rapidfreezing method. After cryopreservationfor 1 month, thawedprocess was carried out at room temperature. Main outcomes are sperm motility was determined by Computer-Assisted Semen Analysis (CASA), sperm morphology was determined by eosin-methylene blue staining and sperm DNA integrity was assessed by TUNEL assay.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Sperm motility was reduced significantly by both methods, from 70.4 (9.0)% to 29.1 (12.3)% in slowprogrammable freezing and to 19.7 (9.8)% in ultra rapid freezing (p < 0.05). Sperm motility decreased significantly more by ultra rapid freezing (p < 0.001). The percentage of normal sperm morphology and DNA integrity were also reduced significantly by both methods. However, no significant difference between the two methods was found (p > 0.05).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Cryopreservation of human sperm for 1 month significantly decreased sperm motility, morphology and DNA integrity in both methods. However sperm motility was decreased more by ultra rapid freezing.
authors.forename: Pattama
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Tongdee
authors.forename: Matchuporn
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Sukprasert
authors.forename: Chonticha
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Satirapod
authors.forename: Anna
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Wongkularb
authors.forename: Wicham
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Choktanasiri
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D002470:Cell Survival; D015925:Cryopreservation / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods; D004247:DNA / Q000032:analysis*; D004249:DNA Damage; D005615:Freezing / Q000009:adverse effects; D006801:Humans; D007248:Infertility, Male / Q000628:therapy; D008297:Male; D009584:Nitrogen / Q000494:pharmacology; D012662:Semen Preservation / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods; D013076:Sperm Count; D013081:Sperm Motility / Q000502:physiology*; D013084:Sperm-Ovum Interactions / Q000502:physiology; D013094:Spermatozoa / Q000502:physiology*; D013997:Time Factors
chemical_list: D004247:DNA; D009584:Nitrogen