Received March 02, 2013
Accepted April 13, 2013

Objective:The aim of this study was to compare the results of the semen analysis data while applying the parameters set out in the previous standard and the last proposed, in order to assess the changes in the diagnosis in terms of normal or abnormal, as how this fact can affect treatment decisions. Methods:1184semen analysis of patients undergoing examination at our institution were reviewed, between January/2010-September/2012 and were classified as normal or abnormal according to WHO parameters of 1999 and 2010 to be then compared. Exams of patients over 50 years(39cases) were excluded for having found in this group a significant increase of asthenozoospermia when compared to younger ages. Results:In the 1145semen analysis studied, the average age of the patients was 37.4years, and no significant difference was found while analyzing the absolute seminal variables of volume, motility and sperm morphology in the different age groups. Semen parameters in the 1999 classification had 42% of the samples reported as normal and 58% abnormal, but when applying the new classification,73% of the samples would be normal and only 27% abnormal. Analyzing sperm motility, 83% of the males were reported as normal with the WHO 2010 compared to a 77% with the WHO 1999 classification. However, the sperm morphology according to the WHO 2010, shows 95% of men within normal limits, whereas with the previous classification, only 39% of them would be fertile. Conclusion:Based in our data, the sperm analysis as a single tool in the diagnosis of male factor should be revaluated.