While generally recognized as a potential source of contamination during the collection process, lubricants are often used at the preference of the male partner to prevent irritation. While older lubricants have been ...While generally recognized as a potential source of contamination during the collection process, lubricants are often used at the preference of the male partner to prevent irritation. While older lubricants have been studied, there is currently no conscience within programs as to what constitutes a “safe” lubricant. The object of the current study was designed to evaluate chemically unique “next generation” lubricants in comparison to lubricants currently in use in fertility treatment and/or recognized as fertility safe;the first was a silicone-based lubricant, the second is a water-based, plant-based organic compound, in comparison to two established medical lubricants and a control. Twelve deidentified semen samples from the clinical andrology laboratory were used to test the lubricants following semen analysis. In order to enter the study, the sample had to have a minimum of 30 × 10<sup>6</sup> motile cells. Samples were then processed using a simple sperm wash modified to reconstitute the pellet into a final volume of 7 mL. Half-milliliter aliquots were then transferred into 13 wells of a standard 24-well culture plate. One well was used as a control. The remaining wells received one of the four lubricants at one of three volumes (10, 50, or 100 uL), producing 12 treatment combinations (four lubricants + 3 concentration levels) and the control. The samples were then cultured at room temperature for 24 hours. At times 0, 1, 3, 12, and 24 hrs, the plate was agitated to remix the sample, and a 4 uL aliquot of each well was analyzed for standard semen parameters using a computer-assisted semen analyzer. Results indicated the expected decrease in semen parameters over time in all treatments (P < 0.001). There was also a dose-dependent drop in most of the lubricants. However, samples contaminated with the newer lubricants appeared to maintain semen parameters similar to the controls at all but the 100 ul level of contamination, while the older lubricants caused decreases in sperm function at much lower concentrations. While semen parameters alone should not be the only criteria for the selection of a lubricant, the present study suggests newer formulations of lubricant are less likely to interfere with sperm function.展开更多
文摘While generally recognized as a potential source of contamination during the collection process, lubricants are often used at the preference of the male partner to prevent irritation. While older lubricants have been studied, there is currently no conscience within programs as to what constitutes a “safe” lubricant. The object of the current study was designed to evaluate chemically unique “next generation” lubricants in comparison to lubricants currently in use in fertility treatment and/or recognized as fertility safe;the first was a silicone-based lubricant, the second is a water-based, plant-based organic compound, in comparison to two established medical lubricants and a control. Twelve deidentified semen samples from the clinical andrology laboratory were used to test the lubricants following semen analysis. In order to enter the study, the sample had to have a minimum of 30 × 10<sup>6</sup> motile cells. Samples were then processed using a simple sperm wash modified to reconstitute the pellet into a final volume of 7 mL. Half-milliliter aliquots were then transferred into 13 wells of a standard 24-well culture plate. One well was used as a control. The remaining wells received one of the four lubricants at one of three volumes (10, 50, or 100 uL), producing 12 treatment combinations (four lubricants + 3 concentration levels) and the control. The samples were then cultured at room temperature for 24 hours. At times 0, 1, 3, 12, and 24 hrs, the plate was agitated to remix the sample, and a 4 uL aliquot of each well was analyzed for standard semen parameters using a computer-assisted semen analyzer. Results indicated the expected decrease in semen parameters over time in all treatments (P < 0.001). There was also a dose-dependent drop in most of the lubricants. However, samples contaminated with the newer lubricants appeared to maintain semen parameters similar to the controls at all but the 100 ul level of contamination, while the older lubricants caused decreases in sperm function at much lower concentrations. While semen parameters alone should not be the only criteria for the selection of a lubricant, the present study suggests newer formulations of lubricant are less likely to interfere with sperm function.
