Journal of Human Reproductive Science
Home Ahead of Print Current Issue Archives
   Bookmark this page Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font size Increase font size    Users online: 6401

ORIGINAL ARTICLE Table of Contents   
Year : 2013  |  Volume : 6  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 152-157
Efficacy of two sperm preparation techniques in reducing non-specific bacterial species from human semen

1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya, Ragama, Sri Lanka
2 Department of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya, Ragama, Sri Lanka

Correspondence Address:
Prabath K Abeysundara
No: 266/D, Polhena Road, Walpola, Ragama
Sri Lanka
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: National Research Council of Sri Lanka, Grant No.09/69, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0974-1208.117169

Rights and Permissions

Context: Artificial reproductive techniques using seminal preparations with bacteria may cause pelvic inflammatory disease and its sequalae. Aims: To assess efficacy of two sperm preparation techniques to clear bacteria and the effect of bacteriospermia on sperm recovery rates. Settings and Design: A descriptive cross-sectional study was carried out among males of subfertile couples. Subjects and Methods: Semen samples were randomly allocated into swim-up method (group S, n = 68) and density gradient method (group D, n = 50) for sperm preparation. Seminal fluid analysis and bacterial cultures were performed in each sample before and after sperm preparation. Statistical Analysis: McNemar's chi-squared test and independent samples t-test in SPSS version 16.0 were used. Results: Organisms were found in 86 (72.88%) out of 118 samples, before sperm preparation; Streptococcus species (n = 40, 46.51% of which 14 were Group D Streptococcus species), Coagulase negative Staphylococcus species (n = 17, 19.76%), Staphylococcus aureus (n = 13, 15.11%), Coliform species (n = 11, 12.79% of which 09 were Escherichia coli) and Corynebacterium species (n = 5, 5.81%). There was a statistically significant reduction of culture positive samples in raw vs. processed samples; in group S, 49 (72.05%) vs. 16 (23.52%) and in group D, 37 (74%) vs. 18 (36%). In group S and D, mean (SD) recovery rates of culture positive vs. culture negative samples were 39.44% (SD-14.02) vs. 44.22% (SD-22.38), P = 0.39 and 52.50% (SD-37.16) vs. 49.58% (SD-40.32), P = 0.82 respectively. Conclusions: Both sperm preparation methods significantly reduced bacteria in semen, but total clearance was not achieved. Sperm recovery rate was not affected by bacteriospermia.

Print this article  Email this article

  Similar in PUBMED
    Search Pubmed for
    Search in Google Scholar for
  Related articles
   Citation Manager
  Access Statistics
   Reader Comments
   Email Alert *
   Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded178    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 5    

Recommend this journal