Vol. 15 No. 1 (2023): Arch Pub Health
Basic Science

Evaluation of semen quality in young men in Republic of North Macedonia

Irena Kostadinova-Petrova
Institute of Medical Histology and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, Republic of North Macedonia
Lena Kakasheva-Mazhenkovska
Institute of Medical Histology and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, Republic of North Macedonia
Elida Mitevska
Institute of Medical Histology and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, Republic of North Macedonia
Ljubica Tasheva
Institute of Medical Histology and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, Republic of North Macedonia
Natasha Stojkovska
Institute of Medical Histology and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, Republic of North Macedonia

Published 2023-04-20

Keywords

  • sperm motility,
  • sperm concentration,
  • sperm morphology

How to Cite

1.
Kostadinova-Petrova I, Kakasheva-Mazhenkovska L, Mitevska E, Tasheva L, Stojkovska N. Evaluation of semen quality in young men in Republic of North Macedonia. Arch Pub Health [Internet]. 2023 Apr. 20 [cited 2024 Mar. 2];15(1):114-25. Available from: https://id-press.eu/aph/article/view/6082

Abstract

Research data show that in the last 50 years (1938-1991) there has been a trend of decreasing sperm concentration in the male population in Europe by 2.3% and in the USA by 0.8%. The reasons for such negative trend are not known, but it is assumed that lifestyle and environmental factors have an influence on genetic factors. Aim of this study was to evaluate sperm quality in young, healthy men in our country, and to compare sperm quality in our population with others in the world. Material and methods: Ejaculates from 203 healthy male subjects, aged 18-32, were stored in a thermostat at 36⁰C and analyzed manually on a native slide and hematoxylin-eosin-stained slides, under a phase contrast microscope. Sperm motility was assessed at two-time intervals, group A, 60 minutes after ejaculation and group B, 120 minutes after ejaculation, while sperm concentration and sperm morphology were assessed at one time interval. Results: Semen analysis showed an average volume of ejaculate 3.45 ± 1.5 ml, sperm concentration in 1 milliliter62.4 ± 39.2 x10(6) /ml, while total sperm concentration was 211.2 ± 173.2 x10(6). In group A, values for progressive spermatozoa were 48.6 ± 18.1 x10(6) /ml and in group B, values for progressive spermatozoa were 47.9 ± 17.3 x10(6) /ml. There was no statistically significant difference between the two time intervals (group A and group B) when interpreting sperm motility, p>0.005. Analysis of morphology of spermatozoa showed a mean value of 6.9% for morphologically normal spermatozoa. Conclusion: The quality of ejaculate in young men in North Macedonia is in the range of reference values according to WHO, and also our results are similar to those from Germany, Turkey, Bulgaria, Faroe Islands.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Rao M, Meng T-Q, Hu S-H et al. Evaluation of semen quality in 1808 university students, from Wuhan, Central China. Asian J Androl 2015;17(1):111-6.
  2. Zinaman MJ, Brown CC, Selevan SG, Clegg ED. Semen quality and human fertility: a prospective study with healthy couples. J Androl 2000; 21(1):145-53.
  3. Carlsen E, Giwercman A, Keiding N, Skakkebaek NE. Evidence for decreasing quality of semen during past 50 years. BMJ 1992; 305(6854):609-13.
  4. Harris ID, Fronczak C, Roth L, Meacham RB. Fertility and the aging male. Reviews in Urology 2011;13(4):184–190.
  5. Sasano N, Ichijo S. Vascular patterns of the human testis with special reference to its senile changes. Tohoku Journal of Experimental Medicine 1969; 99(3):269–280.
  6. WHO. WHO Laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen. 5th ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
  7. WHO. WHO Laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen. 6th ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021.
  8. Mendiola J, Jørgensen N, Mínguez-Alarcón L et al. Sperm counts may have declined in young university students in Southern Spain. Andrology 2013; 1(3):408-13.
  9. Axelsson J, Rylander L, Rignell-Hydbom A, Giwercman A. No secular trend over the last decade in sperm counts among Swedish men from the general population. Hum Reprod 2011; 26(5):1012-6.
  10. Gao J, Sheng Gao E, Walker M et al. Reference values of semen parameters for healthy Chinese men. Urol Int 2008;81(3):256-62.
  11. Jørgensen N, Andersen AG, Eustache F et al.Regional differences in semen quality in Europe. Hum Reprod 2001;6(5): 1012–1019.
  12. Skakkebaek NE, Rajpert-De Meyts E, Germaine M. Buck L, et al. Male reproductive disorders and fertility trends: Influences of environment and genetic susceptibility. Physiol Rev 2016;96(1): 55–97.
  13. Hauser R, Skakkebaek NE, Hass U. Male reproductive disorders, diseases and costs of exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals in the European Union. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 2015;100(4):1267–1277.
  14. Oliva A, Spira A, Multigner L.Contribution of environmental factors to the risk of male innfertility. Hum Reprod 2001;16(8):1768-76.
  15. Barbăroșie C, Agarwal A, Henkel R. Diagnostic value of advanced semen analysis in evaluation of male infertility. Andrologia 2021;53(2): e13625.
  16. Jiang M, Chen X, Yue H et al. Semen quality evaluation in a cohort of 28213 adult males from Sichuan area of South-West China. Andrologia 2014;46(8):842-7.
  17. Li Y, Lin H, Ma M et al. Semen quality in 1346 healthy men, results from the Chongqing area of South-West China. Hum Reprod 2009; 24:459-69
  18. Guzick DS, Overstreet JW, Factor-Litvak P, Brazil CK. Sperm morphology, motility and concentration in fertile and infertile men. New England Journal of Medicine 2001;345(19):1388-93
  19. Slama R, Eustache F, Ducot B. Time to pregnancy and semen parameters: a cross-sectional study among fertile couples from four European cities. Hum Reprod 2002;17(2):503-15.
  20. Dobrinov V, Tacheva D, Rangelova M et al. Semen quality in the general population in Bulgaria. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2020;10:1-12.
  21. Halling J, Petersen MS, Jørgensen N et al. Semen quality and reproductive hormones in Faroese Men: A cross-sectional population-based study of 481men.BMJ Open 2013;3:e001946.
  22. Paasch U, Salzbrunn A, Glander HJ et al. Semen Quality in sub-fertile range for a significant proportion of young men from the general German population: A coordinated, controlled study of 791 men from Hamburg and Leipzig. International Journal of Andrology2008;31: 93-102.
  23. CokI, Karababa G, Şatıroğlu MH, Çakmak Pehlivanlı A, Göney G, Çiftçi U. Semen quality in 24693 Turkish men over a 16 year period (1995-2011). Hacettepe Journal of Biology and Chemistry 2015;43:33-41.