P-052 Redefining Male Infertility: ORP as a Key Marker for Sperm Quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Study question Can ORP serve as a reliable biomarker for male infertility assessment and should it be integrated into routine testing? Summary answer Since ORP does not correlate with DNA fragmentation, both parameters should be routinely assessed in male infertility evaluations for a comprehensive understanding of semen quality. What is known already Oxidative stress plays a crucial role in male infertility by impairing sperm function and increasing DNA fragmentation. ORP is an emerging marker to evaluate oxidative stress levels in semen. Elevated ORP has been associated with poor semen quality, including reduced motility and concentration. However, its relationship with SDF remains unclear, and studies assessing its predictive value for male infertility are limited. Understanding the association between ORP, sperm concentration, and SDF may help refine diagnostic protocols and improve patient management. Study design, size, duration This retrospective cohort study analyzed semen samples from 900 men undergoing fertility evaluation over two years. Participants/materials, setting, methods This study included men (mean age: 38 years) undergoing fertility evaluation. Semen samples were collected and analyzed following WHO guidelines to ensure standardized assessment of oxidative stress and sperm quality. Sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) was measured using the TUNEL assay on the BD FACSLyric flow cytometer, while oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) was assessed with the MiOXSYS analyzer. Semen parameters, including concentration, total sperm count, pH, and abstinence duration, were also recorded. Main results and the role of chance Semen analysis of 900 men undergoing fertility evaluation showed a mean sperm concentration of 57.2 × 106 sperm/mL and a total sperm count of 147.9 × 106 sperm/sample. The mean semen pH was 8.2, and the average abstinence period was 2.9 days. ORP levels averaged 1.7 mV/106 sperm/mL, with values >1.34 mV/106 sperm/mL indicating high oxidative stress. The mean SDF was 19.4%, categorized as low (≤16.9%), moderate (16.9–30%), or high (>30%). The distribution of ORP and SDF categories among patients was: low ORP & low SDF (38.4%), low ORP & moderate SDF (22.6%), low ORP & high SDF (11.8%), high ORP & low SDF (13.8%), high ORP & moderate SDF (7.3%), and high ORP & high SDF (6.1%). A weak, non-significant correlation was found between ORP and SDF (Spearman r = 0.046, 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.11, P = 0.46). However, a significant negative correlation was observed between ORP and sperm concentration (Spearman r = -0.569, 95% CI: -0.61 to -0.52, P < 0.001). Limitations, reasons for caution Potential methodological variations in ORP and SDF measurement techniques may impact results. Standardization across different assay platforms and laboratory conditions is necessary to ensure consistency and reproducibility. Wider implications of the findings ORP is a valuable complementary marker for semen quality, helping identify infertile patients with normal DNA fragmentation. Since oxidative stress affects fertility independently of DFI, evaluating both markers in male infertility assessments could improve diagnostic accuracy and guide personalized treatment strategies, ultimately enhancing reproductive outcomes for affected individuals. Trial registration number No
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".