Analysis of DNA damage after human sperm cryopreservation in genes crucial for fertilization and early embryo development. | - CCMAR -

Journal Article

TitleAnalysis of DNA damage after human sperm cryopreservation in genes crucial for fertilization and early embryo development.
Publication TypeJournal Article
AuthorsValcarce, DG, Cartón-García, F, Riesco, MF, Herráez, MP, Robles, V
Year of Publication2013
Date Published2013 Sep
KeywordsCryopreservation, DNA Damage, Embryonic Development, Freezing, Humans, Hydrogen Peroxide, Male, Reproductive Techniques, Assisted, Sperm Motility, Spermatozoa, Vitrification

Sperm cryopreservation is widely used in clinic for insemination, in vitro fertilization and other procedures such as intracytoplasmic sperm injection. The assessment after freezing/thawing of spermatozoa viability, motility and sometimes DNA integrity (mainly using fragmentation assays) has been considered enough to guarantee the safety and effectiveness of the technique. However, it is known that, even when fragmentation is absent, a significant DNA damage could be detected in some genome regions. This is particularly important considering that, during the last years, several studies have pointed out the importance of key paternal genes in early embryo development. In this study, using normozoospermic donors, we present a candidate gene approach in which we quantify the number of lesions produced by freezing/thawing over key genes (PRM1, BIK, FSHB, PEG1/MEST, ADD1, ARNT, UBE3A, SNORD116/PWSAS) using quantitative PCR. Our results demonstrated that the cryopreservation protocol used, which is routinely employed in clinic, produced DNA lesions. The genes studied are differentially affected by the process, and genome regions related to Prader-Willi and Angelman syndromes were among the most damaged: SNORD116/PWSAS (4.56 ± 1.84 lesions/10 kb) and UBE3A (2.22 ± 1.3 lesions/10 kb). To check if vitrification protocols could reduce these lesions, another experiment was carried out studying some of those genes with higher differences in the first study (FSHB, ADD1, ARNT and SNORD116/PWSAS). The number of lesions was not significantly reduced compared to cryopreservation. These results could be relevant for the selection of the most adequate available cryopreservation protocol in terms of the number of lesions that produced over key genes, when no differences with other traditional techniques for DNA assessment could be detected.


Alternate JournalAndrology
PubMed ID23970451
CCMAR Authors