Você pesquisou por y - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia

You searched for:"Danielle Oliveira de Araújo"

We found (2) results for your search.
  • Artigos Originais

    Interference of age on semen quality

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2008;30(11):561-565

    Summary

    Artigos Originais

    Interference of age on semen quality

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2008;30(11):561-565

    DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032008001100006

    Views1

    PURPOSE: to evaluate the influence of age on the quality of semen in men submitted to spermatic analysis in a human reproduction service, in cases of conjugal infertility. METHODS: a retrospective study in which the spermiograms of all men in process of investigation for conjugal infertility in a service of assisted reproduction in the Northeast of Brazil were evaluated from September 2002 to December 2004. A number of 531 individuals submitted to 531 spermatic evaluations were included in the study. The following parameters have been analyzed: spermatic volume, concentration, motility and morphology. The men under investigation have been divided in groups, according to the results obtained in each of the variables studied. Seminal volume groups were divided in: hypospermia, normospermia and hyperspermia. Spermatic concentration groups were divided in: azoospermia, oligospermia, normospermia and polyspermia. Motility groups were divided in: normal motility and asthenospermia. Morphology groups were divided in: normal morphology and teratospermia. The t test has been used to compare the average age of patients in groups with normal and in groups with altered parameters. The program XLSTAT (p<0.05) has been used for the statistical analysis. RESULTS: the individuals studied presented an average of 37±7.9 years old, with an average of seminal volume of 3±1.4 mL, a spermatic concentration of 61.4±66.4 spermatozoids by mL of semen, a progressive motility of 44.7±19.4% of the total of spermatozoids and normal morphology of 11.2±6.6% of the spermatozoids. Average age among groups were similar, except for that of individuals with hypospermia, which was significantly higher than the one from men with normospermia (39.6±10.3 versus 36.5±7.3, p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: age interferes in an inversely proportional way on the ejaculated volume, but does not influence spermatic concentration, motility and morphology.

    See more
  • Artigos Originais

    Cryopreservation of human semen: comparison between methods of freezing and types of storage

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2006;28(12):708-714

    Summary

    Artigos Originais

    Cryopreservation of human semen: comparison between methods of freezing and types of storage

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2006;28(12):708-714

    DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032006001200004

    Views5

    PURPOSE: to compare two different methods of freezing and two types of human semen storage during cryopreservation process. METHODS: experimental research in which the cryopreservation of 18 semen samples from 18 volunteers was studied. Following the addition of the cryoprotectant medium, Test-yolk buffer, the semen samples were packaged into 0.25 mL straws or into 2 mL cryotubes and submitted to cryopreservation by slow or rapid methods, in four different treatments: RS (cryopreservation by rapid method and packaged in straws), RT (rapid-cryotubes), SS (slow-straws), and ST (slow-cryotubes). Samples were thawed after 24 hand then maintained at 37ºC. Data collected were analyzed by the Student t-test, with p<0.05, using the SPSS computer program for Windows®, version 11.0.0. RESULTS: the motility of spermatozoa decreased after the cryopreservation process. The initial motility rate was 58.1% and motilities after the different methods of cryopreservation were 19.2% (RS), 27% (RT), 21.1% (SS) and 30.3% (ST). There was a significant decrease of the normal morphology. The initial normal morphology was 14.2% and morphologies after the different methods of cryopreservation were 12.8% (RS), 12.6% (RT), 12.6% (SS) and 12.4% (ST). CONCLUSIONS: the slow method of cryopreservation with storage in cryotubes showed the best recovery of motile cells after freezing and thawing. There was no difference among the methods when appraised the morphology.

    See more
    Cryopreservation of human semen: comparison between methods of freezing and types of storage

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