A microfluidic device to reduce treatment time of intracytoplasmic sperm injection

Capsule:
We developed a microfluidic device that can reduce the treatment time of intracytoplasmic sperm injection and compared the treatment time for porcine sperm injection using the method employing this device and the conventional microdroplet method.

Authors:
Koji Matsuura, Ph.D., Takuya Uozumi, M.S., Takuya Furuichi, Ph.D., Ikuyo Sugimoto, M.S., Mieko Kodama, B.S., Hiroaki Funahashi, Ph.D.

Volume 99, Issue 2, Pages 400-407, February 2013

Objective:
To develop a microfluidic device that can reduce the intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment time by increasing sperm concentration.

Design:
We compared the ICSI treatment time required for porcine sperm using a method employing the microfluidic device and one using the conventional microdroplet method.

Settings:
Academic research laboratories at Okayama University.

Animal(s):
Reproductive cells of porcine sperm, oocytes, and embryos.

Intervention(s):
Cell manipulations, ICSI, and embryo culture.

Main Outcome Measure(s):
Average ICSI treatment time and sperm concentration.

Result(s):
The average ICSI treatment time (mean ± SEM) using the method with the microfluidic device for poor-quality semen (sperm concentration, 2.0 × 104 cells/mL) was significantly shorter than the treatment time using the conventional microdroplet method (265 ± 15 seconds [n = 43] vs. 347 ± 19 seconds [n = 50]). When diluted semen with a sperm concentration of 2.0 × 105 cells/mL was used, no significant difference was observed between the two methods (n = 50 and n = 48).

Conclusion(s):
The microfluidic device can reduce the time required for ICSI treatment that is used to increase sperm concentration in poor-quality semen samples. The results suggest that this device may be clinically useful for ICSI treatment in human assisted reproductive technology.

  • NicoGarrido

    Dear Dr Matsuura,
    congratulations on your nice work
    from your results, it seems that the statistical differences are obviously confirmed, but these differences in both means, showing only around 1.5 minutes gap between the two kinds of preparations, do you think they can have a relevant clinical impact when performing ICSI in either humans or other species?
    thank you for your comments

Translate »