润滑剂凝胶的精子毒性测试:我们应该推荐“生育友好”的专业产品吗?

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Human Fertility Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-04-04 DOI:10.1080/14647273.2022.2053214
Joseph Tomlinson, Karen Pooley, Mathew Tomlinson
{"title":"润滑剂凝胶的精子毒性测试:我们应该推荐“生育友好”的专业产品吗?","authors":"Joseph Tomlinson, Karen Pooley, Mathew Tomlinson","doi":"10.1080/14647273.2022.2053214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Couples trying to conceive or providing samples for Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) are advised against the use of lubricant-gels due to the risk of sperm-toxicity. However, gels now exist which are specifically formulated to help couples conceive but without consensus on their toxicity relative to non-specialist products. This study tested gels recently introduced as 'sperm friendly' (FertilSafe Plus, Fertile Check) alongside established lubricants intended for pleasure only using a recently published toxicity testing regime. Computer Assisted Sperm Analysis (CASA) was performed at 1 and 2 h on donor sperm (<i>n</i> = 12) pre-incubated with each gel (10% v/v) and controls. All gels led to a significant loss of motility/velocity at 1 and 2 h (<i>p</i> < 0.01), with the most significant loss from the 2 Durex pleasure products (11% and 15%, vs 47% progression) at 60 min, although these performed better than saliva (used as negative control). Incubation with FertilSafePlus led to the smallest loss of motility (24% vs 47%) at 1 h. Saliva and products designed for lubrication only exhibited the most negative effect on motility and those marketed as 'sperm safe' could be considered the best performers. Whether these affects are due to direct toxicity or are indirect due to other factors such as viscosity, pH or osmolality remains uncertain.</p>","PeriodicalId":13006,"journal":{"name":"Human Fertility","volume":"1 1","pages":"1028-1031"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sperm toxicity testing on lubricant gels: should we be recommending 'fertility-friendly' specialist products?\",\"authors\":\"Joseph Tomlinson, Karen Pooley, Mathew Tomlinson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14647273.2022.2053214\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Couples trying to conceive or providing samples for Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) are advised against the use of lubricant-gels due to the risk of sperm-toxicity. However, gels now exist which are specifically formulated to help couples conceive but without consensus on their toxicity relative to non-specialist products. This study tested gels recently introduced as 'sperm friendly' (FertilSafe Plus, Fertile Check) alongside established lubricants intended for pleasure only using a recently published toxicity testing regime. Computer Assisted Sperm Analysis (CASA) was performed at 1 and 2 h on donor sperm (<i>n</i> = 12) pre-incubated with each gel (10% v/v) and controls. All gels led to a significant loss of motility/velocity at 1 and 2 h (<i>p</i> < 0.01), with the most significant loss from the 2 Durex pleasure products (11% and 15%, vs 47% progression) at 60 min, although these performed better than saliva (used as negative control). Incubation with FertilSafePlus led to the smallest loss of motility (24% vs 47%) at 1 h. Saliva and products designed for lubrication only exhibited the most negative effect on motility and those marketed as 'sperm safe' could be considered the best performers. Whether these affects are due to direct toxicity or are indirect due to other factors such as viscosity, pH or osmolality remains uncertain.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13006,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Fertility\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"1028-1031\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Fertility\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2022.2053214\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/4/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Fertility","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2022.2053214","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/4/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由于精子毒性的风险,建议试图怀孕或为辅助生殖技术(ART)提供样本的夫妇不要使用润滑剂凝胶。然而,现在存在专门用于帮助夫妇怀孕的凝胶,但相对于非专业产品,它们的毒性尚未达成共识。这项研究测试了最近推出的“精子友好”凝胶(FertilSafe Plus, fertility Check),以及用于愉悦的既定润滑剂,仅使用最近公布的毒性测试制度。对每种凝胶(10% v/v)和对照预先孵育的供体精子(n = 12)在1和2 h进行计算机辅助精子分析(CASA)。所有凝胶在第1和2小时导致运动/速度的显著丧失(p < 0.01),在60分钟时,两种杜蕾斯快感产品的运动/速度丧失最为显著(11%和15%,vs 47%),尽管这些产品的表现优于唾液(作为阴性对照)。与FertilSafePlus孵育1小时导致最小的运动损失(24%对47%)。唾液和专为润滑而设计的产品只会对精子活力产生最负面的影响,而那些标榜“精子安全”的产品可能被认为是表现最好的。这些影响是由直接毒性引起的,还是由粘度、pH值或渗透压等其他因素间接引起的,目前尚不确定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Sperm toxicity testing on lubricant gels: should we be recommending 'fertility-friendly' specialist products?

Couples trying to conceive or providing samples for Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) are advised against the use of lubricant-gels due to the risk of sperm-toxicity. However, gels now exist which are specifically formulated to help couples conceive but without consensus on their toxicity relative to non-specialist products. This study tested gels recently introduced as 'sperm friendly' (FertilSafe Plus, Fertile Check) alongside established lubricants intended for pleasure only using a recently published toxicity testing regime. Computer Assisted Sperm Analysis (CASA) was performed at 1 and 2 h on donor sperm (n = 12) pre-incubated with each gel (10% v/v) and controls. All gels led to a significant loss of motility/velocity at 1 and 2 h (p < 0.01), with the most significant loss from the 2 Durex pleasure products (11% and 15%, vs 47% progression) at 60 min, although these performed better than saliva (used as negative control). Incubation with FertilSafePlus led to the smallest loss of motility (24% vs 47%) at 1 h. Saliva and products designed for lubrication only exhibited the most negative effect on motility and those marketed as 'sperm safe' could be considered the best performers. Whether these affects are due to direct toxicity or are indirect due to other factors such as viscosity, pH or osmolality remains uncertain.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Human Fertility
Human Fertility OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: Human Fertility is a leading international, multidisciplinary journal dedicated to furthering research and promoting good practice in the areas of human fertility and infertility. Topics included span the range from molecular medicine to healthcare delivery, and contributions are welcomed from professionals and academics from the spectrum of disciplines concerned with human fertility. It is published on behalf of the British Fertility Society. The journal also provides a forum for the publication of peer-reviewed articles arising out of the activities of the Association of Biomedical Andrologists, the Association of Clinical Embryologists, the Association of Irish Clinical Embryologists, the British Andrology Society, the British Infertility Counselling Association, the Irish Fertility Society and the Royal College of Nursing Fertility Nurses Group. All submissions are welcome. Articles considered include original papers, reviews, policy statements, commentaries, debates, correspondence, and reports of sessions at meetings. The journal also publishes refereed abstracts from the meetings of the constituent organizations.
期刊最新文献
Do very young oocyte donors negatively impact live birth rates in their recipients? The infected blood inquiry report-lessons for gamete donation. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes of singleton pregnancy from donated frozen versus fresh oocytes. Mpox in assisted conception: should we be worried about this monkey wrench? Prevention of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS): British Fertility Society policy and practice guideline.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1