论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨人工常规精液分析(SRA)与计算机辅助精液分析(CASA)两种方法在精液分析中的主要指标差异。方法以CASA系统与SRA分别对896例不育男性的精液标本加以分析,对此两种方法的检验结果加以比较。结果 SRA法精子活动率为(68.12±18.76)%,CASA法为(56.17±19.34)%,比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。SRA法与CASA法精子密度<20×109/L及>50×10~9/L时,比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),精子密度介于(20~50)×10~9/L时,比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论虽然CASA为新型精子质量检测技术,其具有高精度、高效、客观等优点,但仍受诸多因素影响,存在一定局限性,故将之同SRA相结合,以确保结果准确性的有效提高。
Objective To explore the difference of main indexes in semen analysis between artificial routine semen analysis (SRA) and computer assisted semen analysis (CASA). Methods 896 cases of infertile male semen samples were analyzed by CASA system and SRA respectively. The test results of these two methods were compared. Results The sperm motility rate of SRA was (68.12 ± 18.76)% and CASA was (56.17 ± 19.34)%, respectively, with statistical significance (P <0.05). The sperm densities ranged from (20 ~ 50) × 10 ~ 9 / L to those with sperm densities of <20 × 109 / L and> 50 × 10 ~ 9 / L by SRA and CASA methods (P < L, the difference was not statistically significant (P> 0.05). Conclusion Although CASA is a new type of sperm quality detection technology, it has the advantages of high precision, high efficiency and objectivity. However, CASA is still affected by many factors and has some limitations. Therefore, it is combined with SRA to ensure the accuracy of the results.