COMPARISON OF 2 STAINING AND EVALUATION METHODS USED FOR COMPUTERIZEDHUMAN SPERM MORPHOLOGY EVALUATIONS

The purpose of the study was to analyse the agreement between computer analysed (Hamilton Thorne, IVOS Dimensions Version 3) normal sperm mo rphology and values obtained from 97 slides stained according to the P apanicolaou and Diff-Quik method. Liquefied semen samples were washed once by centrifugation and air dried smears on slides were made, which were stained according to the Papanicolaou and Diff-Quik method and a nalysed by computer. The paired t-test was used to assess whether any bias existed between the two methods. The limits of agreement were cal culated using the Bland and Altman approach and a modification of this approach (mean-dependent limits). A significant bias of 1.6% was obta ined in favour of higher normal sperm morphology percentages when usin g the Diff-Quik method. The standard limits of agreement were -13.4% t o 16.6%, whereas the mean-dependent limits of agreement were 1.6% [5.8 + 0.6 (mean percentage normal morphology)]. Statistically, the Diff-Q uik and Papanicolaou staining methods produce different normal sperm m orphology profiles. These inherent differences may, therefore, require the establishment of new normal sperm morphology thresholds for male fertility, based on clinical data, when using the Diff-Quik staining m ethod in conjunction with computerized analysis.