Edmund Ko
Citations
All
Search in:AllTitleAbstractAuthor name
Publications
(4)
Patents
Grants
Pathways
Clinical trials
Publication
Journal: Translational Andrology and Urology
October/31/2017
Abstract
Sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) has been generally acknowledged as a valuable tool for male fertility evaluation. While its detrimental implications on sperm function were extensively investigated, little is known about the actual indications for performing SDF analysis. This review delivers practice based recommendations on commonly encountered scenarios in the clinic. An illustrative description of the different SDF measurement techniques is presented. SDF testing is recommended in patients with clinical varicocele and borderline to normal semen parameters as it can better select varicocelectomy candidates. High SDF is also linked with recurrent spontaneous abortion (RSA) and can influence outcomes of different assisted reproductive techniques. Several studies have shown some benefit in using testicular sperm rather than ejaculated sperm in men with high SDF, oligozoospermia or recurrent in vitro fertilization (IVF) failure. Infertile men with evidence of exposure to pollutants can benefit from sperm DNA testing as it can help reinforce the importance of lifestyle modification (e.g., cessation of cigarette smoking, antioxidant therapy), predict fertility and monitor the patient's response to intervention.
Pulse
Views:
45
Posts:
No posts
Rating:
Not rated
Publication
Journal: Asian Journal of Andrology
October/30/2016
Abstract
Traditionally, the success of a researcher is assessed by the number of publications he or she publishes in peer-reviewed, indexed, high impact journals. This essential yardstick, often referred to as the impact of a specific researcher, is assessed through the use of various metrics. While researchers may be acquainted with such matrices, many do not know how to use them to enhance their careers. In addition to these metrics, a number of other factors should be taken into consideration to objectively evaluate a scientist's profile as a researcher and academician. Moreover, each metric has its own limitations that need to be considered when selecting an appropriate metric for evaluation. This paper provides a broad overview of the wide array of metrics currently in use in academia and research. Popular metrics are discussed and defined, including traditional metrics and article-level metrics, some of which are applied to researchers for a greater understanding of a particular concept, including varicocele that is the thematic area of this Special Issue of Asian Journal of Andrology. We recommend the combined use of quantitative and qualitative evaluation using judiciously selected metrics for a more objective assessment of scholarly output and research impact.
Publication
Journal: World Journal of Men?s Health
May/13/2019
Abstract
Despite advances in the field of male reproductive health, idiopathic male infertility, in which a man has altered semen characteristics without an identifiable cause and there is no female factor infertility, remains a challenging condition to diagnose and manage. Increasing evidence suggests that oxidative stress (OS) plays an independent role in the etiology of male infertility, with 30% to 80% of infertile men having elevated seminal reactive oxygen species levels. OS can negatively affect fertility via a number of pathways, including interference with capacitation and possible damage to sperm membrane and DNA, which may impair the sperm's potential to fertilize an egg and develop into a healthy embryo. Adequate evaluation of male reproductive potential should therefore include an assessment of sperm OS. We propose the term Male Oxidative Stress Infertility, or MOSI, as a novel descriptor for infertile men with abnormal semen characteristics and OS, including many patients who were previously classified as having idiopathic male infertility. Oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) can be a useful clinical biomarker for the classification of MOSI, as it takes into account the levels of both oxidants and reductants (antioxidants). Current treatment protocols for OS, including the use of antioxidants, are not evidence-based and have the potential for complications and increased healthcare-related expenditures. Utilizing an easy, reproducible, and cost-effective test to measure ORP may provide a more targeted, reliable approach for administering antioxidant therapy while minimizing the risk of antioxidant overdose. With the increasing awareness and understanding of MOSI as a distinct male infertility diagnosis, future research endeavors can facilitate the development of evidence-based treatments that target its underlying cause.
Publication
Journal: Current Urology
June/10/2014
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Balanced chromosomal translocations are a relatively common (2-7%) finding among infertile couples. We report clinical features of males with translocations at our institution.
METHODS
Data was collected on men presenting for infertility evaluation between July 2006 March 2010, including presentation, medical history, and infertility treatments. Criteria for genetic evaluation, consisting of karyotype and Y-linked microdeletion assay, included severe oligozoospermia or azoospermia (sperm concentration < 2.5×106/ml) or a history of recurrent miscarriages.
RESULTS
Of the 4,612 patients in our male infertility clinic 306 met criteria for genetic evaluation. Three patients had a balanced translocation, of which 2 had Robertsonian translocations, and 1 had a balanced translocation. One patient had normal bulk semen parameters, normal volume azoospermia, and oligoasthenoteratozoospermia. All patients were offered medical genetics consultation. Potential pregnancy outcomes were evaluated using a predictive software package. One patient had intratubular germ cell neoplasia and underwent orchiectomy; subsequent fertility evaluation has been deferred. The other 2 are considering in-vitro fertilization with pre-implantation genetic evaluation.
CONCLUSIONS
Given the low incidence of balanced translocations detected in our population, better clinical indicators other than semen parameters or history of recurrent pregnancy loss are needed to determine screening for this finding.