10Jun 2023
Intracytoplasmic sperm injection vs. in‐vitro fertilization in couples in whom the male partners had a semen analysis within normal reference ranges: An open debate

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection vs. in‐vitro fertilization in couples in whom the male partners had a semen analysis within normal reference ranges: An open debate

In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the use of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) worldwide, particularly for couples with infertility issues not related to male factors. However, studies have shown that ICSI does not provide any additional benefits compared to conventional in-vitro fertilization (IVF), even in cases where the male partner has normal semen analysis. Insufficient evidence currently exists to support the use of ICSI over IVF for patients with poor ovarian response, low oocyte count, or advanced maternal age. ICSI is a more operator-dependent and invasive technique, and therefore, it should be recommended primarily for cases of male-factor infertility. Some limited evidence suggests a potential increased risk of birth defects associated with ICSI, but further research is needed to draw definitive conclusions. This review aims to address the ongoing debate surrounding ICSI versus standard IVF in assisted reproductive technology cycles where male-factor infertility is not evident and determine whether ICSI improves live birth rates for couples with non-male factor infertility.

  • #urology

Like

Save

Share