Manual versus computer-automated semen analysis

Köse M., KARAKOÇ SÖKMENSÜER L., Demir A., Bozdag G., GÜNALP G. S.

Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol.41, no.6, pp.662-664, 2014 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 41 Issue: 6
  • Publication Date: 2014
  • Doi Number: 10.12891/ceog18102014
  • Journal Name: Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus
  • Page Numbers: pp.662-664
  • Keywords: Assisted reproductive techniques, CASA, Infertility, Sperm
  • Lokman Hekim University Affiliated: No


Objective: To evaluate agreement of conventional sperm analysis with computer-aided semen analysis (CASA) regarding concentration, motility, and morphology using samples from infertile men. Materials and Methods: In this study a total of 195 male partners of couples who underwent evaluation of infertility were included. All semen samples were examined by conventional method and CASA in terms of morphology, motility, and concentration. Pearson correlation analysis and the Bland-Altman method were used to assess correlation and agreement between conventional semen analysis and CASA measurements. Results: When the two methods were compared in terms of concentration, motility, and morphology, there was a statistically significant correlation in all variables. The best correlation was obtained for sperm concentration. However, there was a poor correlation for sperm morphology between conventional method and CASA. Sperm concentration and morphology obtained by CASA were 14% and 87% lower, respectively; motility was 21% higher than the conventional method. Conclusion: Although CASA systems are objective and rapid, they should be evaluated in terms of cost-effectiveness, however they may be useful in over-loaded assisted reproductive technique (ART) clinics.