Review Article | Published:

Microfluidics for sperm analysis and selection

Nature Reviews Urology volume 14, pages 707730 (2017) | Download Citation

Abstract

Infertility is a growing global health issue with far-reaching socioeconomic implications. A downward trend in male fertility highlights the acute need for affordable and accessible diagnosis and treatment. Assisted reproductive technologies are effective in treating male infertility, but their success rate has plateaued at 33% per cycle. Many emerging opportunities exist for microfluidics — a mature technology in other biomedical areas — in male infertility diagnosis and treatment, and promising microfluidic approaches are under investigation for addressing male infertility. Microfluidic approaches can improve our fundamental understanding of sperm motion, and developments in microfluidic devices that use microfabrication and sperm behaviour can aid semen analysis and sperm selection. Many burgeoning possibilities exist for engineers, biologists, and clinicians to improve current practices for infertility diagnosis and treatment. The most promising avenues have the potential to improve medical practice, moving innovations from research laboratories to clinics and patients in the near future.

Key points

  • Sperm swim using periodic but time-irreversible and unidirectional flagellar motion. When sperm swim near a boundary, hydrodynamic sperm–wall interactions result in surface accumulation and boundary-following behaviour

  • Microfluidic techniques paired with high-speed imaging have resolved the full 3D swimming patterns of sperm in bulk fluid and revealed a 2D slither swimming mode for sperm near surfaces

  • Microfluidics show promise in studying sperm rheotaxis and chemotaxis. Future research needs to focus on developing high-throughput platforms with single-cell-analysis capabilities to study human sperm chemotaxis

  • Microfluidic technologies are emerging as rapid and low-cost diagnostic alternatives for at-home and clinical male fertility testing, and technologies for additional, automated morphological analysis of sperm are needed

  • Microfluidic platforms enable selection of high-quality sperm by mimicking the in vivo process. These technologies show promise for near-term advances in both understanding male infertility and clinical implementation

  • Translation of microfluidic technologies for male infertility into the consumer market and clinical practices has been slow. A combination of multidisciplinary collaborations and market opportunity will speed up this process

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    , , , & Estimating the prevalence of infertility in Canada. Hum. Reprod. 27, 738–746 (2012).

  2. 2.

    , , & International estimates of infertility prevalence and treatment-seeking: potential need and demand for infertility medical care. Hum. Reprod. 22, 1506–1512 (2007).

  3. 3.

    , , , & Infertility and the provision of infertility medical services in developing countries. Hum. Reprod. Update 14, 605–621 (2008).

  4. 4.

    et al. Male reproductive disorders and fertility trends: influences of environment and genetic susceptibility. Physiol. Rev. 96, 55–97 (2015).

  5. 5.

    , & Is there a problem with male reproduction? Nat. Clin. Pract. Endocrinol. Metab. 5, 144–145 (2009).

  6. 6.

    & The science of ART. Science 296, 2188–2190 (2002).

  7. 7.

    , , & A unique view on male infertility around the globe. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 13, 37 (2015).

  8. 8.

    , & Semen quality in the 21 st century. Nat. Rev. Urol. 14, 120–130 (2017).

  9. 9.

    et al. Constant decline in sperm concentration in infertile males in an urban population: experience over 18 years. Fertil. Steril. 84, 1657–1661 (2005).

  10. 10.

    , , , & Decline in sperm count and motility in young adult men from 2003 to 2013: observations from a U.S. sperm bank. Andrology 4, 270–276 (2016).

  11. 11.

    et al. Decline of semen quality among 10 932 males consulting for couple infertility over a 20-year period in Marseille, France. Asian J. Androl. 14, 584–590 (2012).

  12. 12.

    , & Male reproductive disorders in humans and prenatal indicators of estrogen exposure. Reprod. Toxicol. 21, 4–15 (2006).

  13. 13.

    et al. Influence of increasing body mass index on semen and reproductive hormonal parameters in a multi-institutional cohort of subfertile men. Fertil. Steril. 106, 1070–1075 (2016).

  14. 14.

    , , , & The effect of obesity on sperm disorders and male infertility. Nat. Rev. Urol. 7, 153–161 (2010).

  15. 15.

    et al. Male infertility: a public health issue caused by sexually transmitted pathogens. Nat. Rev. Urol. 11, 672–687 (2014).

  16. 16.

    & The biology of infertility: research advances and clinical challenges. Nat. Med. 14, 1197–1213 (2008).

  17. 17.

    WHO. WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen 5 th edn (WHO Press, 2010).

  18. 18.

    & Role of sperm chromatin abnormalities and DNA damage in male infertility. Hum. Reprod. Update 9, 331–345 (2003).

  19. 19.

    et al. Total motile sperm count: a better indicator for the severity of male factor infertility than the WHO sperm classification system. Hum. Reprod. 30, 1110–1121 (2015).

  20. 20.

    et al. The relationship between sperm viability and DNA fragmentation rates. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 13, 42 (2015).

  21. 21.

    & Semen analysis and sperm function testing. Asian J. Androl. 14, 6–13 (2012).

  22. 22.

    et al. Computer-assisted sperm analysis (CASA) as a tool for monitoring sperm quality in fish. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. C. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 130, 425–433 (2001).

  23. 23.

    Semen analysis and sperm function tests: how much to test? Indian J. Urol. 27, 41–48 (2011).

  24. 24.

    et al. World Health Organization reference values for human semen characteristics. Hum. Reprod. Update 16, 231–245 (2010).

  25. 25.

    et al. Use of computer assisted sperm analysis (CASA) for monitoring the effects of pollution on sperm quality of fish; application to the effects of heavy metals. Aquat. Toxicol. 36, 223–237 (1996).

  26. 26.

    , & Comparison of four methods to evaluate sperm DNA integrity between mouse caput and cauda epididymidis. Asian J. Androl. 14, 335–337 (2012).

  27. 27.

    et al. Sperm DNA integrity assessment in prediction of assisted reproduction technology outcome. Hum. Reprod. 22, 174–179 (2006).

  28. 28.

    , & At home testing: optimizing management for the infertility physician. Fertil. Steril. 95, 1867–1878 (2011).

  29. 29.

    Semen analysis: looking for an upgrade in class. Fertil. Steril. 97, 260–266 (2012).

  30. 30.

    , , , & Men with a complete absence of normal sperm morphology exhibit high rates of success without assisted reproduction. Asian J. Androl. 19, 39–42 (2016).

  31. 31.

    & The predicament of masculinity: towards understanding the male's experience of infertility treatments. Sex. Roles 30, 663–677 (1994).

  32. 32.

    Masturbation, semen collection and men's IVF experiences: anxieties in the muslim world. Body Soc. 13, 37–53 (2007).

  33. 33.

    , & Patient noncompliance after vasectomy. Fertil. Steril. 68, 552–555 (1997).

  34. 34.

    Clinical and laboratory management of male infertility: an opinion on its current status. J. Androl. 21, 814–821 (2000).

  35. 35.

    et al. Live-birth rates and multiple-birth risk using in vitro fertilization. JAMA 282, 1832–1838 (1999).

  36. 36.

    , & Multiple birth resulting from ovarian stimulation for subfertility treatment. Lancet 365, 1807–1816 (2005).

  37. 37.

    et al. Final ART success rates: a 10 years survey. Hum. Reprod. 26, 2239–2246 (2011).

  38. 38.

    , , , & The total pregnancy potential per oocyte aspiration after assisted reproduction — in how many cycles are biologically competent oocytes available? J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 33, 849–854 (2016).

  39. 39.

    , & Cumulative live-birth rates after in vitro fertilization. N. Engl. J. Med. 360, 236–243 (2009).

  40. 40.

    et al. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies world report: assisted reproductive technology 2008, 2009 and 2010. Hum. Reprod. 31, 1588–1609 (2016).

  41. 41.

    et al. Prevalence of abnormal sperm DNA denaturation in fertile and infertile men. Urology 60, 1069–1072 (2002).

  42. 42.

    & Effects of advanced selection methods on sperm quality and ART outcome: a systematic review. Hum. Reprod. Update 17, 719–733 (2011).

  43. 43.

    et al. Reproductive technologies and the risk of birth defects. N. Engl. J. Med. 366, 1803–1813 (2012).

  44. 44.

    et al. Effects of semen storage and separation techniques on sperm DNA fragmentation. Fertil. Steril. 94, 2626–2630 (2010).

  45. 45.

    et al. Semen quality of young adult ICSI offspring: the first results. Hum. Reprod. 31, 2811–2820 (2016).

  46. 46.

    et al. Maternal and live-birth outcomes of pregnancies following assisted reproductive technology: a retrospective cohort study. Sci. Rep. 6, 35141 (2016).

  47. 47.

    , , & Prolonged incubation of processed human spermatozoa will increase DNA fragmentation. Andrologia 46, 374–379 (2014).

  48. 48.

    , & Preparation and incubation conditions affect the DNA integrity of ejaculated human spermatozoa. Asian J. Androl. 12, 753–759 (2010).

  49. 49.

    et al. Is fine morphology of the human sperm nuclei affected by in vitro incubation at 37 °C? Fertil. Steril. 88, 1589–1594 (2007).

  50. 50.

    , & The present and future role of microfluidics in biomedical research. Nature 507, 181–189 (2014).

  51. 51.

    The origins and the future of microfluidics. Nature 442, 368–373 (2006).

  52. 52.

    , & Physics and applications of microfluidics in biology. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 4, 261–286 (2002).

  53. 53.

    , & Paper-based microfluidic point-of-care diagnostic devices. Lab. Chip 13, 2210–2251 (2013).

  54. 54.

    , , & Diagnostics for the developing world: microfluidic paper-based analytical devices. Anal. Chem. 82, 3–10 (2010).

  55. 55.

    The study of spermatozoa and sorting in relation to human reproduction. Microfluid. Nanofluid. 18, 755–774 (2015).

  56. 56.

    , & Microfluidics for sperm research. Trends Biotechnol. 33, 221–229 (2015).

  57. 57.

    et al. Sperm processing for advanced reproductive technologies: where are we today? Biotechnol. Adv. 34, 578–587 (2016).

  58. 58.

    & Microfluidic devices for the study of sperm migration. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 23, 227–234 (2017).

  59. 59.

    et al. Emergence of upstream swimming via a hydrodynamic transition. Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 108102 (2015).

  60. 60.

    & Sperm transport in the female reproductive tract. Hum. Reprod. Update 12, 23–37 (2006).

  61. 61.

    Life at low Reynolds number. Am. J. Phys. 45, 3 (1977).

  62. 62.

    & Fluid mechanics of propulsion by cilia and flagella. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 9, 339–398 (1977).

  63. 63.

    & The hydrodynamics of swimming microorganisms. Rep. Prog. Phys. 72, 96601 (2009).

  64. 64.

    Life around the scallop theorem. Soft Matter 7, 3060–3065 (2011).

  65. 65.

    Sperm flagella: comparative and phylogenetic perspectives of protein components. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 17, 524–538 (2011).

  66. 66.

    in Proc. Sec. Int. Symp. Aqua-Biomech. (Caltech, 2003).

  67. 67.

    et al. Strategies for locating the female gamete: the importance of measuring sperm trajectories in three spatial dimensions. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 17, 511–523 (2011).

  68. 68.

    & Flagellar and ciliary beating: the proven and the possible. J. Cell Sci. 123, 519–528 (2010).

  69. 69.

    , , & How molecular motors shape the flagellar beat. HFSP J. 1, 192–208 (2007).

  70. 70.

    , , , & Structural mechanism of the dynein power stroke. Nat. Cell Biol. 16, 479–485 (2014).

  71. 71.

    , , & Nonlinear instability in flagellar dynamics: a novel modulation mechanism in sperm migration? J. R. Soc. Interface 7, 1689–1697 (2010).

  72. 72.

    , & Kinematics of human spermatozoa. Gamete Res. 4, 83–95 (1981).

  73. 73.

    , & Comparative study of the beat patterns of American and Asian horseshoe crab sperm: evidence for a role of the central pair complex in forming planar waveforms in flagella. Cytoskeleton 9, 264–270 (1988).

  74. 74.

    & A study of helical and planar waves on sea urchin sperm flagella, with a theory of how they are generated. J. Exp. Biol. 204, 1333–1345 (2001).

  75. 75.

    , & [Ca2+]i signalling in sperm—making the most of what you've got. Nat. Cell Biol. 9, 235–242 (2007).

  76. 76.

    Ca2+ channels and signalling in cilia and flagella. Trends Cell Biol. 4, 305–310 (1994).

  77. 77.

    , , & Spontaneous recovery after experimental manipulation of the plane of beat in sperm flagella. Nature 325, 351–352 (1987).

  78. 78.

    Flagellar oscillation: a commentary on proposed mechanisms. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 85, 453–470 (2010).

  79. 79.

    Comparative analysis of mammalian sperm motility. J. Cell Biol. 53, 561–573 (1972).

  80. 80.

    , , & The measurement of sperm motility and factors affecting sperm quality in cultured fish. Aquaculture 234, 1–28 (2004).

  81. 81.

    CASA — practical aspects. J. Androl. 21, 515–524 (2000).

  82. 82.

    & Computer-assisted sperm analysis (CASA): capabilities and potential developments. Theriogenology 81, 5–17.e3 (2014).

  83. 83.

    , , & Review of digital holographic microscopy for three-dimensional profiling and tracking. Opt. Eng. 53, 112306 (2014).

  84. 84.

    et al. Holographic imaging of unlabelled sperm cells for semen analysis: a review. J. Biophotonics 8, 779–789 (2015).

  85. 85.

    & Lensless imaging and sensing. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 18, 77–102 (2016).

  86. 86.

    & Unconventional methods of imaging: computational microscopy and compact implementations. Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 76001 (2016).

  87. 87.

    et al. Imaging without lenses: achievements and remaining challenges of wide-field on-chip microscopy. Nat. Methods 9, 889–895 (2012).

  88. 88.

    , & High-throughput lensfree 3D tracking of human sperms reveals rare statistics of helical trajectories. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 16018–16022 (2012).

  89. 89.

    et al. Sperm trajectories form chiral ribbons. Sci. Rep. 3, 1664 (2013).

  90. 90.

    et al. Digital holography as a method for 3D imaging and estimating the biovolume of motile cells. Lab Chip 13, 4512–4516 (2013).

  91. 91.

    et al. Quantitative label-free animal sperm imaging by means of digital holographic microscopy. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 16, 833–840 (2010).

  92. 92.

    , , & Hydrodynamic attraction of swimming microorganisms by surfaces. Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 38102 (2008).

  93. 93.

    Non-random distribution of bull spermatozoa in a drop of sperm suspension. Nature 198, 1221–1222 (1963).

  94. 94.

    & Sperm motility in the presence of boundaries. Bull. Math. Biol. 57, 679–699 (1995).

  95. 95.

    , , , & Fluid dynamics and noise in bacterial cell-cell and cell-surface scattering. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 10940–10945 (2011).

  96. 96.

    , & Hydrodynamics of sperm cells near surfaces. Biophys. J. 99, 1018–1026 (2010).

  97. 97.

    Motility of spermatozoa at surfaces. Reproduction 126, 259–270 (2003).

  98. 98.

    & Surface accumulation of spermatozoa: a fluid dynamic phenomenon. Math. Sci. 34, 74–87 (2009).

  99. 99.

    , , & Human sperm accumulation near surfaces: a simulation study. J. Fluid Mech. 621, 289–320 (2009).

  100. 100.

    , , , & Bend propagation in the flagella of migrating human sperm, and its modulation by viscosity. Cell. Motil. Cytoskeleton 66, 220–236 (2009).

  101. 101.

    , & On the movement of slender bodies near plane boundaries at low Reynolds number. J. Fluid Mech. 72, 529–540 (1975).

  102. 102.

    , & How spermatozoa come to be confined to surfaces. Cell. Motil. Cytoskeleton 54, 56–63 (2003).

  103. 103.

    , & Modelling bacterial behaviour close to a no-slip plane boundary: the influence of bacterial geometry. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A. 466, 1725–1748 (2010).

  104. 104.

    et al. Comment on the article by J. Elgeti, U. B. Kaupp, and G. Gampper: hydrodynamics of sperm cells near surfaces. Biophys. J. 100, 2318–2320 (2011).

  105. 105.

    , , & High-precision tracking of sperm swimming fine structure provides strong test of resistive force theory. J. Exp. Biol. 213, 1226–1234 (2010).

  106. 106.

    , & Physics of microswimmers — single particle motion and collective behavior: a review. Rep. Prog. Phys. 78, 56601 (2015).

  107. 107.

    Bacterial hydrodynamics. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 48, 105–130 (2016).

  108. 108.

    , & Response to comment on article: hydrodynamics of sperm cells near surfaces. Biophys. J. 100, 2321–2324 (2011).

  109. 109.

    , & Observations on the response of human spermatozoa to gravity, boundaries and fluid shear. J. Reprod. Fertil. 70, 511–523 (1984).

  110. 110.

    , , & Two-dimensional slither swimming of sperm within a micrometre of a surface. Nat. Commun. 6, 8703 (2015).

  111. 111.

    Basic research: just keep swimming — sperm exhibit a 2D slither motion. Nat. Rev. Urol. 13, 2–3 (2015).

  112. 112.

    , , , & Coarse-graining the fluid flow around a human sperm. Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 124501 (2017).

  113. 113.

    , & Cooperation of sperm in two dimensions: synchronization, attraction, and aggregation through hydrodynamic interactions. Phys. Rev. E Stat. Nonlin. Soft Matter Phys. 78, 61903 (2008).

  114. 114.

    , , & A study of synchronisation between the flagella of bull spermatozoa, with related observations. J. Exp. Biol. 212, 2215–2223 (2009).

  115. 115.

    , & Two-dimensional flagellar synchronization in viscoelastic fluids. J. Fluid Mech. 646, 505–515 (2009).

  116. 116.

    , , & Flagellar synchronization through direct hydrodynamic interactions. eLife 3, e02750 (2014).

  117. 117.

    & Synchronization of flexible sheets. J. Fluid Mech. 674, 163–173 (2011).

  118. 118.

    Analysis of the swimming of microscopic organisms. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A 209, 447–461 (1951).

  119. 119.

    , & A self-organized vortex array of hydrodynamically entrained sperm cells. Science 309, 300–303 (2005).

  120. 120.

    , , & Human spermatozoa migration in microchannels reveals boundary-following navigation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 8007–8010 (2012).

  121. 121.

    , , & Ciliary contact interactions dominate surface scattering of swimming eukaryotes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 1187–1192 (2013).

  122. 122.

    & Hydrodynamic analysis of flagellated bacteria swimming in corners of rectangular channels. Phys. Rev. E Stat. Nonlin. Soft Matter Phys. 92, 63016 (2015).

  123. 123.

    , , & Predominance of sperm motion in corners. Sci. Rep. 6, 26669 (2016).

  124. 124.

    , , & Sperm dynamics in tubular confinement. Small 11, 781–785 (2015).

  125. 125.

    Mammalian sperm interactions with the female reproductive tract. Cell Tissue Res. 363, 185–194 (2016).

  126. 126.

    , , , & Designing 3-dimensional in vitro oviduct culture systems to study mammalian fertilization and embryo production. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 45, 1731–1744 (2017).

  127. 127.

    & Rheotaxis guides Mammalian sperm. Curr. Biol. 23, 443–452 (2013).

  128. 128.

    , & Recent microfluidic devices for studying gamete and embryo biomechanics. J. Biomech. 48, 1671–1678 (2015).

  129. 129.

    & Sperm guidance in mammals – an unpaved road to the egg. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 7, 276–285 (2006).

  130. 130.

    & Sperm motility: is viscosity fundamental to progress? Mol. Hum. Reprod. 17, 539–544 (2011).

  131. 131.

    , & Viscoelastic fluid response can increase the speed and efficiency of a free swimmer. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 38101 (2010).

  132. 132.

    , & Swimming speeds of filaments in nonlinearly viscoelastic fluids. Phys. Fluids 21, 33102 (2009).

  133. 133.

    Propulsion in a viscoelastic fluid. Phys. Fluids 19, 83104 (2007).

  134. 134.

    Fallopian tube isthmic mucus and ovum transport. Science 201, 349–351 (1978).

  135. 135.

    & . Rheotaxis of spermatozoa. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 153, 490–502 (1961).

  136. 136.

    & Fluid flow and sperm guidance: a simulation study of hydrodynamic sperm rheotaxis. J. R. Soc. Interface 12, 20150172 (2015).

  137. 137.

    et al. Human sperm rheotaxis: a passive physical process. Sci. Rep. 6, 23553 (2016).

  138. 138.

    , , & Rheotaxis facilitates upstream navigation of mammalian sperm cells. eLife 3, e02403 (2014).

  139. 139.

    , , & Characterization of rheotaxis of bull sperm using microfluidics. Integr. Biol. (Camb.) 6, 1111–1121 (2014).

  140. 140.

    , , , & Cooperative roles of biological flow and surface topography in guiding sperm migration revealed by a microfluidic model. Lab Chip 14, 1348–1356 (2014).

  141. 141.

    et al. Microgrooves and fluid flows provide preferential passageways for sperm over pathogen Tritrichomonas foetus. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 5431–5436 (2015).

  142. 142.

    , , , & Bimodal rheotactic behavior reflects flagellar beat asymmetry in human sperm cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 15904–15909 (2015).

  143. 143.

    , , , & Sperm capacitation in humans is transient and correlates with chemotactic responsiveness to follicular factors. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 92, 11039–11043 (1995).

  144. 144.

    Sperm chemotaxis. Rev. Reprod. 4, 56–66 (1999).

  145. 145.

    , , & The computational sperm cell. Trends Cell Biol. 24, 198–207 (2014).

  146. 146.

    et al. The signal flow and motor response controling chemotaxis of sea urchin sperm. Nat. Cell Biol. 5, 109–117 (2003).

  147. 147.

    , & How to attract a sperm. Nat. Cell Biol. 5, 93–96 (2003).

  148. 148.

    et al. Sperm navigation along helical paths in 3D chemoattractant landscapes. Nat. Commun. 6, 7985 (2015).

  149. 149.

    & Chemotaxis of sperm cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 13256–13261 (2007).

  150. 150.

    , , , & Sperm chemotaxis promotes individual fertilization success in sea urchins. J. Exp. Biol. 219, 1458–1466 (2016).

  151. 151.

    , , , & Chemotaxis assays of mouse sperm on microfluidic devices. Anal. Chem. 78, 3354–3359 (2006).

  152. 152.

    et al. Integration of sperm motility and chemotaxis screening with a microchannel-based device. Clin. Chem. 56, 1270–1278 (2010).

  153. 153.

    , , , & Different migration patterns of sea urchin and mouse sperm revealed by a microfluidic chemotaxis device. PLoS ONE 8, e60587 (2013).

  154. 154.

    & Microfluidics for mammalian cell chemotaxis. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 40, 1316–1327 (2012).

  155. 155.

    , , & An agarose-based microfluidic platform with a gradient buffer for 3D chemotaxis studies. Biomed. Microdevices 11, 827–835 (2009).

  156. 156.

    , , & Dendritic cell chemotaxis in 3D under defined chemokine gradients reveals differential response to ligands CCL21 and CCL19. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 5614–5619 (2011).

  157. 157.

    , & Progesterone activates the principal Ca2+ channel of human sperm. Nature 471, 387–391 (2011).

  158. 158.

    et al. Generation of gradients on a microfluidic device: toward a high-throughput investigation of spermatozoa chemotaxis. PLoS ONE 10, e0142555 (2015).

  159. 159.

    Semen assessment. Urol. Clin. North Am. 41, 163–167 (2014).

  160. 160.

    & in Infertility in the Male (eds Niederberger, C. S., Lipshultz, L. I. & Howards, S. S.) 550–573 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2009).

  161. 161.

    et al. Make it spin: individual trapping of sperm for analysis and recovery using micro-contact printing. Lab Chip 14, 2635–2641 (2014).

  162. 162.

    et al. Sperm quality assessment via separation and sedimentation in a microfluidic device. Analyst 138, 4967–4974 (2013).

  163. 163.

    , & A novel microfluidic device for male subfertility screening. J. Urol. 175, 2223–2227 (2006).

  164. 164.

    et al. Direct characterization of motion-dependent parameters of sperm in a microfluidic device: proof of principle. Clin. Chem. 59, 493–501 (2013).

  165. 165.

    et al. Analysis of sperm concentration and motility in a microfluidic device. Microfluid. Nanofluid. 10, 59–67 (2011).

  166. 166.

    , , , & On-chip determination of spermatozoa concentration using electrical impedance measurements. Lab Chip 10, 1018–1024 (2010).

  167. 167.

    et al. Spermometer: electrical characterization of single boar sperm motility. Fertil. Steril. 106, 773–780.e6 (2016).

  168. 168.

    , & Development of computer-assisted sperm analysis plugin for analyzing sperm motion in microfluidic environments using Image-J. Theriogenology 84, 1367–1377 (2015).

  169. 169.

    , & NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat. Methods 9, 671–675 (2012).

  170. 170.

    et al. Isolation of rare circulating tumour cells in cancer patients by microchip technology. Nature 450, 1235–1239 (2007).

  171. 171.

    et al. Microfluidic, marker-free isolation of circulating tumor cells from blood samples. Nat. Protoc. 9, 694–710 (2014).

  172. 172.

    et al. Rare cell isolation and analysis in microfluidics. Lab Chip 14, 626–645 (2014).

  173. 173.

    et al. An automated smartphone-based diagnostic assay for point-of-care semen analysis. Sci. Transl Med. 9, eaai7863 (2017).

  174. 174.

    et al. Mobile device for disease diagnosis and data tracking in resource-limited settings. Clin. Chem. 59, 629–640 (2013).

  175. 175.

    et al. Imaging and sizing of single DNA molecules on a mobile phone. ACS Nano 8, 12725–12733 (2014).

  176. 176.

    et al. Clinical and consumer trial performance of a sensitive immunodiagnostic home test that qualitatively detects low concentrations of sperm following vasectomy. J. Urol. 180, 2569–2576 (2008).

  177. 177.

    et al. SpermCheck Fertility, an immunodiagnostic home test that detects normozoospermia and severe oligozoospermia. Hum. Reprod. 25, 853–861 (2010).

  178. 178.

    OTC product: Fertell. J. Am. Pharm. Assoc. (2003) 47, e16–e17 (2007).

  179. 179.

    , , , & Development of a novel home sperm test. Hum. Reprod. 21, 145–149 (2006).

  180. 180.

    et al. Paper-based diagnostic devices for evaluating the quality of human sperm. Microfluid. Nanofluid. 16, 857–867 (2014).

  181. 181.

    , , , & Relationship between porcine sperm motility and sperm enzymatic activity using paper-based devices. Sci. Rep. 7, 46213 (2017).

  182. 182.

    et al. Correlation of sperm motility with mitochondrial enzymatic activities. Clin. Chem. 44, 1616–1620 (1998).

  183. 183.

    et al. Paper-based quantification of male fertility potential. Clin. Chem. 62, 458–465 (2016).

  184. 184.

    , & Toward a microfluidics-based home male fertility test. Clin. Chem. 62, 421–422 (2016).

  185. 185.

    , , , & Direct DNA analysis with paper-based ion concentration polarization. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 137, 13913–13919 (2015).

  186. 186.

    , , , & Paper-based sperm DNA integrity analysis. Anal. Methods 8, 6260–6264 (2016).

  187. 187.

    et al. Assisted reproductive technology and birth defects among liveborn infants in Florida, Massachusetts, and Michigan, 2000–2010. JAMA Pediatr. 170, e154934 (2016).

  188. 188.

    , & in Medical and Surgical Management of Male Infertility (eds Botros RMB, R., Nabil, A., Ashok, A. & Sabanegh, J. E.) 244–251 (Jaypee Brothers Med. Publ., 2014).

  189. 189.

    Novel technologies for selecting the best sperm for in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil. Steril. 99, 1023–1029 (2013).

  190. 190.

    , & Analyzing IVF laboratory error rates: highlight or hide? Reprod. Biomed. Online 31, 447–448 (2015).

  191. 191.

    et al. Application of failure mode and effect analysis in an assisted reproduction technology laboratory. Reprod. Biomed. Online 33, 132–139 (2016).

  192. 192.

    , , , & Mammalian sperm motility: observation and theory. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 43, 501–528 (2011).

  193. 193.

    & Biofluidmechanics of reproduction. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 38, 371–394 (2006).

  194. 194.

    , , & in Microfluidics for Medical Applications (eds van den Berg, A. & Segernik, L.) 131–150 (R. Soc. Chem., 2015).

  195. 195.

    , & Lab-on-a-chip biophotonics: its application to assisted reproductive technologies. J. Biophotonics 660, 650–660 (2012).

  196. 196.

    et al. Passively driven integrated microfluidic system for separation of motile sperm. Anal. Chem. 75, 1671–1675 (2003).

  197. 197.

    , , , & Isolation of motile spermatozoa from semen samples using microfluidics. Reprod. Biomed. Online 7, 75–81 (2003).

  198. 198.

    et al. Separation efficiency of a microfluidic sperm sorter to minimize sperm DNA damage. Fertil. Steril. 105, 315–321.e1 (2016).

  199. 199.

    , , & Development of sorting, aligning, and orienting motile sperm using microfluidic device operated by hydrostatic pressure. Microfluid. Nanofluid. 3, 561–570 (2007).

  200. 200.

    et al. High-throughput flowing upstream sperm sorting in a retarding flow field for human semen analysis. Analyst 142, 938–944 (2017).

  201. 201.

    et al. In vitro fertilization on a single-oocyte positioning system integrated with motile sperm selection and early embryo development. Anal. Chem. 83, 2964–2970 (2011).

  202. 202.

    , & Development of a novel electrophoretic system for the isolation of human spermatozoa. Hum. Reprod. 20, 2261–2270 (2005).

  203. 203.

    , , & Sperm cells manipulation employing dielectrophoresis. Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng. 36, 1353–1362 (2013).

  204. 204.

    et al. Towards microfluidic sperm refinement: impedance-based analysis and sorting of sperm cells. Lab Chip 16, 1514–1522 (2016).

  205. 205.

    et al. Microfluidic single sperm entrapment and analysis. Lab Chip 15, 1294–1301 (2015).

  206. 206.

    et al. Motile and non-motile sperm diagnostic manipulation using optoelectronic tweezers. Lab Chip 10, 3213–3217 (2010).

  207. 207.

    et al. A noninvasive, motility independent, sperm sorting method and technology to identify and retrieve individual viable nonmotile sperm for intracytoplasmic sperm injection. J. Urol. 184, 2466–2472 (2010).

  208. 208.

    et al. Small but perfectly formed? Successes, challenges, and opportunities for microfluidics in the chemical and biological sciences. Chem 2, 201–223 (2017).

  209. 209.

    , , , & Cellular cargo delivery: toward assisted fertilization by sperm-carrying micromotors. Nano Lett. 16, 555–561 (2016).

  210. 210.

    et al. Exhaustion of racing sperm in nature-mimicking microfluidic channels during sorting. Small 9, 3374–3384 (2013).

  211. 211.

    et al. Rapid selection of sperm with high DNA integrity. Lab Chip 14, 1142–1150 (2014).

  212. 212.

    , , , & Microfluidic assessment of swimming media for motility-based sperm selection. Biomicrofluidics 9, 44113 (2015).

  213. 213.

    , , & A wall of funnels concentrates swimming bacteria. J. Bacteriol. 189, 8704–8707 (2007).

  214. 214.

    et al. Using ratchets and sorters to fractionate motile cells of Escherichia coli by length. Lab Chip 8, 1888–1895 (2008).

  215. 215.

    et al. Geometrical guidance and trapping transition of human sperm cells. Phys. Rev. E Stat. Nonlin. Soft Matter Phys. 89, 32720 (2014).

  216. 216.

    et al. Disrupting the wall accumulation of human sperm cells by artificial corrugation. Biomicrofluidics 9, 24122 (2015).

  217. 217.

    et al. Turning the corner in fertility: high DNA integrity of boundary-following sperm. Lab Chip 16, 2418–2422 (2016).

  218. 218.

    et al. Escherichia coli swim on the right-hand side. Nature 435, 1271–1274 (2005).

  219. 219.

    et al. Lensless imaging for simultaneous microfluidic sperm monitoring and sorting. Lab Chip 11, 2535–2540 (2011).

  220. 220.

    et al. Selection of functional human sperm with higher DNA integrity and fewer reactive oxygen species. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 3, 1671–1679 (2014).

  221. 221.

    et al. Virtual azoospermia and cryptozoospermia — fresh/frozen testicular or ejaculate sperm for better IVF outcome? J. Androl. 32, 484–490 (2011).

  222. 222.

    & Male factor infertility in 2011: semen quality, sperm selection and hematospermia. Nat. Rev. Urol. 9, 68–70 (2012).

  223. 223.

    & Commercialization of microfluidic devices. Trends Biotechnol. 32, 347–350 (2014).

  224. 224.

    , & Engineers are from PDMS-land, biologists are from Polystyrenia. Lab Chip 12, 1224–1237 (2012).

  225. 225.

    et al. A microfluidic culture model of the human reproductive tract and 28-day menstrual cycle. Nat. Commun. 8, 14584 (2017).

  226. 226.

    et al. Improved bovine embryo production in an oviduct-on-a-chip system: prevention of poly-spermic fertilization and parthenogenic activation. Lab Chip 17, 905–916 (2017).

  227. 227.

    , & Verification of male infertility biomarkers in seminal plasma by multiplex selected reaction monitoring assay. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 10, (2011).

  228. 228.

    et al. Differential diagnosis of azoospermia with proteomic biomarkers ECM1 and TEX101 quantified in seminal plasma proteomic biomarkers ECM1 and TEX101 quantified in seminal plasma. Sci. Transl Med. 5, 212ra160 (2013).

  229. 229.

    , , & Seminal plasma as a diagnostic fluid for male reproductive system disorders. Nat. Rev. Urol. 11, 278–288 (2014).

  230. 230.

    et al. Systematic characterization of seminal plasma piRNAs as molecular biomarkers for male infertility. Sci. Rep. 6, 24229 (2016).

  231. 231.

    , & The discovery of prostate-specific antigen. BJU Int. 101, 5–10 (2008).

  232. 232.

    Practical approaches to the diagnosis and management of male infertility. Nat. Clin. Pract. Urol. 2, 226–238 (2005).

  233. 233.

    & In-vitro fertilisation. Obstet. Gynaecol. Reprod. Med. 18, 300–306 (2008).

  234. 234.

    , , & Pregnancies after intracytoplasmic injection of single spermatozoon into an oocyte. Lancet 340, 17–18 (1992).

  235. 235.

    , , & Sperm selection in natural conception: what can we learn from mother nature to improve assisted reproduction outcomes? Hum. Reprod. Update 21, 711–726 (2015).

  236. 236.

    & The propulsion of sea-urchin spermatozoa. J. Exp. Biol. 32, 802–814 (1955).

  237. 237.

    in Random Walks in Biology (ed. Berg, H. C.) 75–94 (Princeton Univ. Press, 1983).

  238. 238.

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. ART success rates. CDC (2017).

  239. 239.

    The World Bank. World Data Bank. The World Bank (2017).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC I2IPJ469164-14, NSERC RGPIN-2015-06701), Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR 139088), the Ontario Centres of Excellence (169411), and MaRS Innovation. The authors also gratefully acknowledge an NSERC E.W.R. Steacie Memorial Fellowship (DS), the Canada Research Chairs Program (DS), an NSERC postdoctoral fellowship (RN), and a Queen's University postdoctoral fund (RN).

Author information

Author notes

    • Reza Nosrati
    •  & Percival J. Graham

    These authors contributed equally to this work.

Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemical Engineering, Queen's University, 19 Division Street, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6.

    • Reza Nosrati
    •  & Carlos Escobedo
  2. Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto, 5 King's College Road, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 3G8.

    • Reza Nosrati
    • , Percival J. Graham
    • , Biao Zhang
    • , Jason Riordon
    •  & David Sinton
  3. Hannam Fertility Centre, 160 Bloor St. East, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M4W 3R2.

    • Alexander Lagunov
    •  & Thomas G. Hannam
  4. Department of Surgery, Division of Urology, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, 600 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 1X5.

    • Keith Jarvi

Authors

  1. Search for Reza Nosrati in:

  2. Search for Percival J. Graham in:

  3. Search for Biao Zhang in:

  4. Search for Jason Riordon in:

  5. Search for Alexander Lagunov in:

  6. Search for Thomas G. Hannam in:

  7. Search for Carlos Escobedo in:

  8. Search for Keith Jarvi in:

  9. Search for David Sinton in:

Contributions

R.N., P.J.G., B.Z. and J.R. researched data for and wrote the article. All authors made substantial contributions to discussion of content and reviewed and edited the manuscript before submission.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Sinton.

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary information

    Supplementary information Tables S1–S2

About this article

Publication history

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2017.175