Morphology Normal Range

[Cuddlepie]

Hi,

Have been doing some natural remedy with Sharkey recently before we embark on our next FET, they have kind of raised an interesting point which so far I haven't given much thought of.

Of reviewing all the tests for both me and DH, they noticed that DH's morphology is 2% which was done March 07 with Sydney IVF. The previous one was 23% done in 04 with IVF Aust.

They said the ideal range is 30%, so this is a bit low.

Googled it straight away. Apparently, there are some confusion on this topic, as the criteria been changed by WHO (don't ask me what it stands for). Before was 15% and now average is 2-4%. Interestingly, also see a post somewhere saying that the average for SIVF is 2%, equivalent to 14% elsewhere.

Anyone has any brain wave on this? On one hand, I am kicking myself how come I didn't notice this before, this might be it why we are still TTC. On the other hand, what would be the next step if DH's morphology is really a 'dud'? ICIS?

Enlighten me please! :-) thanks ladies

[butterfly_warrior]

Firstly, WHO is the world health organisation... not that it helps much!

I'm currently desperately seraching for the scrap of paper I scribbled on when I last spoke to my clinic's scientists about all things sperm. They did mention what DH's current morphology was, and what they usually accept for donor sperm... and it just turned up on my desk - bother! I have DH's morphology (20%), but not what they wanted for donor sperm... but it is absolutely impossible to compare values if they are measured on different scales.

For us, motility is a bigger problem. When it comes to sperm that are capable of conception on their own (rapid progressive), DH has scored an absolute zero on every single sample whether it be for analysis or for IVF. We use ICSI, and neither the motility or morphology problems have got in our way... and I think that's the key bit of information I wanted to get across in this post. ICSI is the next step, and it will overcome morphology problems (the scientists will hand pick the best ones) and motility problems.

BW

[slyder]

SIVF, to my knowledge, use a very strict scale to assess normal morphology. This scale assesses any sperm which isn't textbook perfect (even slightly off) as being abnormal. However, these sperm may still be quite capable of fertilisation. There hasn't been a lot of research in to this.

According to the local path lab, a normal morph result is anything over 15%. Whereas SIVF said anything over 3% was normal. It is amazing that only 3% of normally shaped sperm is considered average (and this has recently changed again I believe to a lower figure), but they say humans really aren't the best breeders and it's normal to have more d!cky sperm than good.

[Cuddlepie]

Thank you BW and Slyder for the quick reply...I am glad I post this and got some answers (that won't make me too freaked out) before DH hits our front door... I am also glad that I resist the urge to pick up the phone to yell at SIVF this afternoon 'why not alert me if only 2% normal morphology?'

DH's motility and count are both star performers, We've done 2 cycles of IVF and seems fert rate is not a problem but not a great number of blasties either (1st cycle 15 eggs, 2 blasties, 2nd cycle 8 eggs, 2 blasties).

Glad to know that ICSI can bypass these male factor 'flaws'...

Any vitamins I should start feeding DH to improve his fertility?

[butterfly_warrior]

Our FS put DH on folate and 3g of vitamin C, but you may want to look into menevit, which is specifically designed to improve semen parameters. It can be hard to find, though.

BW

[slyder]

Yep Menevit is all the rage at the moment, whether it's any good or not who knows. It's not commercially available but the branch of SIVF I'm with are doing a free trial. Apart from that BeiBei they seem to know stuff all about MF infertility/sub-fertility so the best thing you can do is just keep plugging away.