Você pesquisou por y - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia

You searched for:"Bibiana Eliza Zago"

We found (1) results for your search.
  • Artigos Originais

    Should semen analysis be requested for men with a history of previous fertility?

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2006;28(11):652-657

    Summary

    Artigos Originais

    Should semen analysis be requested for men with a history of previous fertility?

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2006;28(11):652-657

    DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032006001100004

    Views2

    PURPOSE: to determine if the previous fertility history can predict current fertility status of a patient examined for couple’s infertility. METHODS: retrospective study involving semen analyses from 183 consecutive subfertile patients evaluated from September 2002 to March 2004. We excluded those patients who had undergone radio or chemotherapy, orchiectomy or vasectomy. Mean values of all analyses were used for patients with multiple semen analysis. Patients with more than 20x10(6) sperm/mL, motility higher than 50% and with normal strict sperm morphology higher than 14% were considered normal. Patients were divided into two groups, according to the fertility status: primary infertility (118 patients) and secondary infertility (65 patients). Data were analyzed according to the chi2 test and the Student t-test. RESULTS: no differences were detected in the mean age between patients with primary infertility, 37.3±6.3, and secondary infertility, 38.1±5.9; p=0.08. In the group of patients with primary infertility, 51.9% (61 patients) had a normal sperm concentration, 70.3% (83 patients) had normal sperm motility and 26.3% (31 patients) had normal sperm morphology. In the group of patients with secondary infertility, 53.8% (35 patients) had normal sperm concentration, 75.4% (49 patients) had normal sperm motility and 32.3% (21 patients) had normal sperm morphology. No significant differences were detected in sperm concentration (21.3x10(6)/mL versus 23.1x10(6)/mL; p=0.07), motility (45.2 versus 48.1%; p=0.08) and morphology (6.1 versus 6.4%; p=0.09) between groups of patients with primary and secondary infertility. CONCLUSIONS: semen analysis should be requested even in cases of prior male fertility. Physicians should not presume a patient to have a normal semen analysis based on his previous history of initiating a pregnancy.

    See more

Search

Search in:

Article type
abstract
book-review
brief-report
case-report
case-report -
correction
editorial
editorial -
letter
letter -
other
other -
rapid-communication
research-article
research-article -
review-article
review-article -
Section
Arigos Originais
Artigo de Revisão
Original Articles
Carta ao Editor
Carta ao Editor
Cartas
Case Report
Case Reports
Caso e Tratamento
Clinical Consensus Recommendation
Corrigendum
Editoriais
Editorial
Editorial
Equipamentos e Métodos
Errata
Erratas
Erratum
Febrasgo Position Statement
Febrasgo Statement
Febrasgo Statement Position
FIGO Statement
GUIDELINES
Integrative Review
Letter to Editor
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor
Métodos e Técnicas
Nota do Editor
Nota Prévia
Original Article
Original Article/Contraception
Original Article/Infertility
Original Article/Obstetrics
Original Article/Oncology
Original Article/Sexual Violence/Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology
Original Article/Teaching and Training
Original Articles
Original Articles
Relato de Caso
Relato de Casos
Relatos de Casos
Reply to the Letter to the Editor
Resposta dos Autores
Resumo De Tese
Resumo De Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Teses
Resumos de Teses
Resumos dos Trabalhos Premiados no 50º Congresso Brasileiro de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Revisão
Revisão
Short Communication
Special Article
Systematic Review
Técnica e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Métodos
Trabalhos Originais
Year / Volume
2024; v.46
2023; v.45
2022; v.44
2021; v.43
2020; v.42
2019; v.41
2018; v.40
2017; v.39
2016; v.38
2015; v.37
2014; v.36
2013; v.35
2012; v.34
2011; v.33
2010; v.32
2009; v.31
2008; v.30
2007; v.29
2006; v.28
2005; v.27
2004; v.26
2003; v.25
2002; v.24
2001; v.23
2000; v.22
1999; v.21
1998; v.20
ISSUE