Intracytoplasmic Morphology-Selected Sperm Injection

  • Luke Simon
  • Aaron Wilcox
  • Douglas T. CarrellEmail author
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 927)


Approximately 40% of sterility in couples can be attributed to male subfertility and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) has become a powerful tool in assisted reproduction to overcome male infertility. Intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection (IMSI) is an advanced and sophisticated method of ICSI, where prior to sperm injection the morphology of the sperm is evaluated under high magnification. In addition, the IMSI procedure involves a few minor modifications in sperm preparation which are not carried out during the conventional ICSI procedure, such as the use of MSOME criteria, the requirement for a glass-bottomed dish for selection, prolonged sperm manipulation following separation from the seminal fluid, and sperm storage prior to microinjection. These variations are discussed in this chapter.

Key words

High magnification Intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection Male infertility Motile sperm organelle morphology examination Sperm morphology Sperm selection 



This work was supported by University of Utah, and Andrology and IVF laboratories.


  1. 1.
    Kruger TF et al (1987) New method of evaluating sperm morphology with predictive value for human in vitro fertilization. Urology 30:248–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kruger TF et al (1986) Sperm morphologic features as a prognostic factor in in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 46:1118–1123PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Donnelly ET et al (1998) In vitro fertilization and pregnancy rates: the influence of sperm motility and morphology on IVF outcome. Fertil Steril 70:305–314PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Huszar G, Vigue L (1993) Incomplete development of human spermatozoa is associated with increased creatine phosphokinase concentration and abnormal head morphology. Mol Reprod Dev 34:292–298PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kahraman S et al (2006) Preliminary FISH studies on spermatozoa and embryos in patients with variable degrees of teratozoospermia and a history of poor prognosis. Reprod Biomed Online 12:752–761PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Faure AK et al (2007) Predictive factors for an increased risk of sperm aneuploidies in oligo-astheno-teratozoospermic males. Int J Androl 30:153–162PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Miller JE, Smith TT (2001) The effect of intracytoplasmic sperm injection and semen parameters on blastocyst development in vitro. Hum Reprod 16:918–924PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    De Vos A et al (2003) Influence of individual sperm morphology on fertilization, embryo morphology, and pregnancy outcome of intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril 79:42–48PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bartoov B et al (2002) Real-time fine morphology of motile human sperm cells is associated with IVF-ICSI outcome. J Androl 23:1–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Antinori M et al (2008) Intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection: a prospective randomized trial. Reprod Biomed Online 16:835–841PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bartoov B et al (2003) Pregnancy rates are higher with intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection than with conventional intracytoplasmic injection. Fertil Steril 80:1413–1419PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hazout A et al (2006) High-magnification ICSI overcomes paternal effect resistant to conventional ICSI. Reprod Biomed Online 12:19–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Berkovitz A et al (2005) The morphological normalcy of the sperm nucleus and pregnancy rate of intracytoplasmic injection with morphologically selected sperm. Hum Reprod 20:185–190PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Franco JG Jr et al (2008) Significance of large nuclear vacuoles in human spermatozoa: implications for ICSI. Reprod Biomed Online 17:42–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Garolla A et al (2008) High-power microscopy for selecting spermatozoa for ICSI by physiological status. Reprod Biomed Online 17:610–616PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cohen-Bacrie P et al (2007) Indications for IMSI. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 36(Suppl 3):S105–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vanderzwalmen P et al (2008) Blastocyst development after sperm selection at high magnification is associated with size and number of nuclear vacuoles. Reprod Biomed Online 17:617–627PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cassuto NG et al (2009) A new real-time morphology classification for human spermatozoa: a link for fertilization and improved embryo quality. Fertil Steril 92:1616–1625PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Balaban B et al (2011) Clinical outcome of intracytoplasmic injection of spermatozoa morphologically selected under high magnification: a prospective randomized study. Reprod Biomed Online 22:472–476Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Knez K et al (2011) The IMSI procedure improves poor embryo development in the same infertile couples with poor semen quality: a comparative prospective randomized study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 9:123PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oliveira JB et al (2011) Pregnancy outcomes in women with repeated implantation failures after intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection (IMSI). Reprod Biol Endocrinol 9:99PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sermondade N et al (2011) Successful childbirth after intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection without assisted oocyte activation in a patient with globozoospermia. Hum Reprod 26:2944–2949PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wilding M et al (2011) Intracytoplasmic injection of morphologically selected spermatozoa (IMSI) improves outcome after assisted reproduction by deselecting physiologically poor quality spermatozoa. J Assist Reprod Genet 28:253–262PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Setti AS et al (2010) Intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcome versus intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection outcome: a meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed Online 21:450–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bartoov B et al (1994) Improved diagnosis of male fertility potential via a combination of quantitative ultramorphology and routine semen analyses. Hum Reprod 9:2069–2075PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Andrology and IVF Laboratories, Division of Urology, Department of SurgeryUniversity of Utah School of MedicineSalt Lake CityUSA
  2. 2.Department of Surgery, Andrology and IVF Laboratories, Department of Obstetrics and Gyneclogy, Department of Human GeneticsUniversity of Utah School of MedicineSalt Lake CityUSA

Personalised recommendations