Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) efficiently addresses male factor infertility. However, the occurrence of abnormal fertilization, mainly characterized by abnormal pronuclei (PN) patterns, merits investigation. To investigate abnormal fertilization patterns following ICSI and identify their respective associations with abnormal parameters in semen analysis (SA), a retrospective observational study including 1855 cycles was performed. Male infertility diagnosis relied on the 2010 WHO criteria. The population was divided into groups based on their SA results. The presence of 2PNs and extrusion of the second polar body (PB) indicated normal fertilization. A Kruskal-Wallis test along with a Wilcoxon post hoc evaluation and Bonferroni correction was employed for comparison among the groups. For the pregnancy rate, logistic regression was employed. No correlation was established between the SA abnormalities and the 1PN or 3PN formation rates. The highest and lowest 0PN rates were reported for the oligoasthenoteratozoospermic and normal groups, respectively. The lowest cleavage formation rates were identified in the oligoasthenozoospermic and oligoasthenoteratozoospermic groups. The aforementioned groups along with the oligoteratozoospermic group similarly presented the lowest blastocyst formation rates. For the clinical pregnancy rate, no statistically significant difference was observed. In conclusion, the incidence of two or more abnormal SA parameters - with the common denominator being oligozoospermia - may jeopardize normal fertilization, cleavage, and blastocyst rates. Once the developmental milestone of achieving blastocyst stage status was achieved, only oligoasthenozoospermia and oligoasthenoteratozoospermia were associated with lower rates. Interestingly, following adjustment for the number of blastocysts, no statistically significant differences were observed.

Purpose: Despite the significant role of varicocele in the pathogenesis of male infertility, the impact of varicocele repair (VR) on conventional semen parameters remains controversial. Only a few systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMAs) have evaluated the impact of VR on sperm concentration, total motility, and progressive motility, mostly using a before-after analytic approach. No SRMA to date has evaluated the change in conventional semen parameters after VR compared to untreated controls. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of VR on conventional semen parameters in infertile patients with clinical varicocele compared to untreated controls. Materials and Methods: A literature search was performed using Scopus, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases following the Population Intervention Comparison Outcome (PICOS) model (Population: infertile patients with clinical varicocele; Intervention: VR [any technique]; Comparison: infertile patients with clinical varicocele that were untreated; Outcome: sperm concentration, sperm total count, progressive sperm motility, total sperm motility, sperm morphology, and semen volume; Study type: randomized controlled trials and observational studies). Results: A total of 1,632 abstracts were initially assessed for eligibility. Sixteen studies were finally included with a total of 2,420 infertile men with clinical varicocele (1,424 patients treated with VR vs. 996 untreated controls). The analysis showed significantly improved post-operative semen parameters in patients compared to controls with regards to sperm concentration (standardized mean difference [SMD] 1.739; 95% CI 1.129 to 2.349; p<0.001; I2=97.6%), total sperm count (SMD 1.894; 95% CI 0.566 to 3.222; p<0.05; I2=97.8%), progressive sperm motility (SMD 3.301; 95% CI 2.164 to 4.437; p<0.01; I2=98.5%), total sperm motility (SMD 0.887; 95% CI 0.036 to 1.738; p=0.04; I2=97.3%) and normal sperm morphology (SMD 1.673; 95% CI 0.876 to 2.470; p<0.05; I2=98.5%). All the outcomes showed a high inter-study heterogeneity, but the sensitivity analysis showed that no study was sensitive enough to change these results. Publication bias was present only in the analysis of the sperm concentration and progressive motility. No significant difference was found for the semen volume (SMD 0.313; 95% CI -0.242 to 0.868; I2=89.7%). Conclusions This study provides a high level of evidence in favor of a positive effect of VR to improve conventional semen parameters in infertile men with clinical varicocele. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first SRMA to compare changes in conventional semen parameters after VR with changes in parameters of a control group over the same period. This is in contrast to other SRMAs which have compared semen parameters before and after VR, without reference to a control group. Our findings strengthen the available evidence and have a potential to upgrade professional societies’ practice recommendations favoring VR to improve conventional semen parameters in infertile men.