Is quality assurance in semen analysis still really necessary? A view from the andrology laboratory.

Quality assurance (QA) is a fundamental part of laboratory medicine, of which internal and external QA (proficiency testing) is an important part. In a recent debate article published in Human Reproduction, it was argued that it was no longer necessary for semen analysis to be subject to QA, primarily because it is now being performed robustly and there is little evidence that it has any real clinical value. In response to this argument, it is suggested here that although there may have been some improvements in the training of laboratory scientists, recent studies have shown that the techniques of semen analysis are still poorly implemented at many locations. Moreover, as the impact of the introduction of QA into the andrology laboratory begins to take effect, there are a growing number of studies showing that the results of semen analysis do correlate well with natural conception and some assisted reproductive technologies. However, since the processes of QA are central to the principles of total quality management, which in turn underpins the process of laboratory accreditation, QA needs to remain in the andrology (and embryology) laboratory so that they can achieve the same accredited status as medical laboratories in other disciplines.

[1]  A. Pacey,et al.  Lack of compliance by UK andrology laboratories with World Health Organization recommendations for sperm morphology assessment. , 2005, Human Reproduction.

[2]  A. Jequier Is quality assurance in semen analysis still really necessary? A clinician's viewpoint. , 2005, Human reproduction.

[3]  E. Seli,et al.  Extent of nuclear DNA damage in ejaculated spermatozoa impacts on blastocyst development after in vitro fertilization. , 2004, Fertility and sterility.

[4]  G C Althouse,et al.  Determining sample size for the morphological assessment of sperm. , 2004, Theriogenology.

[5]  A. Agarwal,et al.  Role of sperm chromatin abnormalities and DNA damage in male infertility. , 2003, Human reproduction update.

[6]  H. Baker,et al.  Frequency of defective sperm-zona pellucida interaction in severely teratozoospermic infertile men. , 2003, Human reproduction.

[7]  D. L. Williams,et al.  Clinical pathology accreditation: standards for the medical laboratory , 2002, Journal of clinical pathology.

[8]  S. Esteves Lack of standardization in performance of the semen analysis among laboratories in the United States. , 2002, International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology.

[9]  V Sharma,et al.  Embryo quality and IVF treatment outcomes may correlate with different sperm comet assay parameters. , 2002, Human reproduction.

[10]  D. Mortimer,et al.  ESHRE basic semen analysis courses 1995-1999: immediate beneficial effects of standardized training. , 2002, Human reproduction.

[11]  D. Brison,et al.  The spectrum of DNA damage in human sperm assessed by single cell gel electrophoresis (Comet assay) and its relationship to fertilization and embryo development. , 2002, Human reproduction.

[12]  J W Overstreet,et al.  Sperm morphology, motility, and concentration in fertile and infertile men. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  Viroj Wiwanitkit,et al.  Types and frequency of preanalytical mistakes in the first Thai ISO 9002:1994 certified clinical laboratory, a 6 – month monitoring , 2001, BMC clinical pathology.

[14]  B. A. Keel,et al.  Lack of standardization in performance of the semen analysis among laboratories in the United States. , 2001, Fertility and sterility.

[15]  M. Wikland,et al.  The application of quality systems in ART programs , 2000, Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology.

[16]  J P Bonde,et al.  Computer-assisted semen analysis parameters as predictors for fertility of men from the general population. The Danish First Pregnancy Planner Study Team. , 2000, Human reproduction.

[17]  R. Aitken,et al.  DNA integrity in human spermatozoa: relationships with semen quality. , 2000, Journal of andrology.

[18]  D. Lamb,et al.  World Health Organization Laboratory Manual for the Examination of Human Semen and Sperm‐Cervical Mucus Interaction, 4th ed. , 2000, Journal of Andrology.

[19]  T. K. Jensen,et al.  Relation between semen quality and fertility: a population-based study of 430 first-pregnancy planners , 1998, The Lancet.

[20]  C. Price Understanding Accreditation in Laboratory Medicine , 1997 .

[21]  P. Matson Andrology: External quality assessment for semen analysis and sperm antibody detection: results of a pilot scheme , 1995 .

[22]  H. Seltman,et al.  Sperm morphology as diagnosed by strict criteria: probing the impact of teratozoospermia on fertilization rate and pregnancy outcome in a large in vitro fertilization population. , 1994, Fertility and sterility.

[23]  C. Lombard,et al.  Sperm morphologic features as a prognostic factor in in vitro fertilization. , 1986, Fertility and sterility.

[24]  A. Pacey,et al.  Sperm transport in the female reproductive tract. , 2006, Human reproduction update.

[25]  A. Pacey Implantation and Early Development: What makes ‘good sperm’? , 2005 .

[26]  M. Wikland,et al.  Is your IVF programme good? , 2002, Human reproduction.

[27]  [Laboratory manual of the WHO for the examination of human semen and sperm-cervical mucus interaction]. , 2001, Annali dell'Istituto superiore di sanita.

[28]  Jens Peter Bonde,et al.  Sperm chromatin damage impairs human fertility , 2000 .

[29]  J. Macleod Human semen. , 1956, Fertility and sterility.