Skip Navigation


Human Reproduction Update Advance Access originally published online on July 14, 2007
Human Reproduction Update 2007 13(6):515-526; doi:10.1093/humupd/dmm024
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
13/6/515    most recent
dmm024v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in 2006: Evidence and Evolution

The ESHRE Capri Workshop Group*,

Correspondence address. P.G. Crosignani, II Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Milano, Via Commenda 12, 20122 Milano, Italy. Tel: +39-025-032-0256; Fax: +39-025-032-0255; E-mail: piergiorgio.crosignani{at}unimi.it

The introduction of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in 1992 has dramatically changed the management of severe male infertility. In severe male infertility, live birth rates with ICSI are superior to those with other non-donor treatments. In non-male infertility, however, pregnancy rates are not better with ICSI than with in vitro fertilization (IVF). With obstructive or non-obstructive azoospermia, reasonable pregnancy rates are now possible with ICSI after recovery of sperm from the testes followed by ICSI. Genetic counselling is indicated for severe male infertility, whether or not ICSI is considered. ICSI is indicated in preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) to avoid contamination by extraneous DNA in the case of PCR-based testing and to increase the number of embryos available for testing. In turn, PGD may be indicated in pregnancies that are at high risk of aneuploidy because of genetic factors associated with azoospermia. As with IVF, not all couples succeed, but 2% of couples with failed ICSI cycles will conceive without treatment. ICSI outcome studies indicate that there is a significant increase in prematurity, low birthweight, and perinatal mortality associated with single and multiple births, similar to the outcomes of conventional IVF. However, as evidenced in long-term follow-up studies, the higher rates of urogenital abnormalities and increased use of healthcare may be associated with paternal characteristics.

Key words: intracytoplasmic sperm injection / male infertility / preimplantation genetic diagnosis


* A meeting was organized by ESHRE (Capri, 2–3 September 2006) with an unrestricted educational grant from Institut Biochimique SA to discuss the above subjects. The speakers included: M. Bonduelle (Centre for Medical Genetics, Universitair Ziekenhuis Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium), P. Braude (Department of Women's Health, King's College London, School of Medicine at Guy's King's and St Thomas' Hospitals, London, UK), J. Collins (McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada), P. Devroey (Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Universitair Ziekenhuis Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium), J.L.H. Evers (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Academic Hospital Maastricht, The Netherlands), B.C.J.M. Fauser (Department of Reproductive Medicine and Gynecology, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands), I. Liebaers (Centre for Medical Genetics, Universitair Ziekenhuis Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium), G.D. Palermo (Andrology and Assisted Fertilization, Cornell Institute for Reproductive Medicine, New York, USA), A. Templeton (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Aberdeen, Mat. Hospital, UK). The discussants included: D.T. Baird (Centre for Reproductive Biology, University of Edinburgh, UK), J. Cohen (8 rue de Marignan, Paris, France), P.G. Crosignani (II Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Milano, Italy), E. Diczfalusy (Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden), K. Diedrich (Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Germany), L. Fraser (Reproduction and Rhythms Group, School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Kings College London, UK), L. Gianaroli (S.I.S.Me.R., Bologna, Italy), A. Glasier (Family Planning and WW Services, Edinburgh, UK), G. Ragni (U.O.C. Sterilità di Coppia ed Andrologia, Fondazione Policlinico, Mangiagalli e Regina Elena, Milano, Italy), A. Sunde (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Trondheim, Norway) B. Tarlatzis (Infertility and IVF Center, Thessaloniki, Greece), A. Van Steirteghem (Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Universitair Ziekenhuis Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium). The report was prepared by J. Collins (Hamilton) and P.G. Crosignani (Milano).

Received on March 12, 2007; revised May 24, 2007; accepted on June 13, 2007


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
A. N. Andersen, E. Carlsen, and A. Loft
Trends in the use of intracytoplasmatic sperm injection marked variability between countries
Hum. Reprod. Update, August 16, 2008; (2008) dmn032v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.