Introduction
Materials and methods
Results
Source | Location | Period | Study population | Age of men | Type of study | Exposure (range min-max) | Outcome |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Environmental exposure | |||||||
Santi, et al. 2016 [25] | Italy, Modena | Nov 2014 to Feb 2015 | 406 men from the Clinical Pathology of the Nuovo Ospedale Civile Sant Agostino Estense (NOCSAE) | 32.3 ± 5.2 | Retrospective cohort study | PM10 (4–155 μg/m3) | Volume, concentration (× 106/mL), total sperm number, typical/atypical forms (%),progressive motility (%), non-progressive motility (%), total motility (%), leucocytes |
PM2.5 (1–101 μg/m3) | |||||||
Wu, et al. 2016 [27] | China, Wuhan | March 2013 to Dec 2015 | 1759 men, partners of women undergoing assisted reproductive technology | 34.4 ± 5.4 | Retrospective cohort study | PM10 (67.2–197 μg/m3) | Concentration (× 106/mL), sperm count, total motility (%), progressive motility (%), |
PM2,5 (27.3–172.4 μg/m3) | |||||||
Radwan, et al. 2016 [23] | Poland, Lodz | Jan 2008 to Apr 2011 | 327 men from infertility clinic | 32.3 ± 4.4 | Cross-sectional | PM10 (11.78–120.5 μg/m3) | Concentration (× 106/mL), motility (%), sperm with abnormal morphology (%), DFI(%), HDS(%), CASA parameters: VSL, VCL, LIN; FSH, E2, T |
PM2.5 (7.99–93.89 μg/m3) | |||||||
SO2 (9.12–167.9 μg/m3) | |||||||
CO (0.15–1.85 μg/m3) | |||||||
NOx (2.17–215.14 μg/m3) | |||||||
Jurewicz, et al. 2015 [34] | Poland, Lodz | – | 212 men from infertility clinic | 22–57 | Cross-sectional | PM10 (11.59–122.8 μg/m3) | Sperm aneuploidy, sperm concentration (× 106/mL), total motility (%), abnormal morphology (%) |
32.25 ± 5.72 | PM2,5 (7.99–95.22 μg/m3) | ||||||
O3 (12.33–79.75 μg/m3) | |||||||
SO2 (10.11–160.90 μg/m3) | |||||||
CO (0.17–1.79 μg/m3) | |||||||
NOx (2.32–218.30 μg/m3) | |||||||
Radwan, et al. 2015 [35] | Poland, Lodz | Jan 2008 to Apr 2011 | 181 men from infertility clinic | 32.1 ± 4.6 | Cross-sectional | 1 PAH metabolites in urine 1-OHP (0.04–2.03 μg/g creat) | Sperm aneuploidy, sperm concentration (× 106/mL), total motility (%), normal sperm morphology (%), |
Zhou, et al. 2014 [21] | China, Chongqing | 2007 | 1346 men from family planning institutions | 20–40 | Cross-sectional | PM10 (66–160.5 μg/m3) | Volume, concentration (× 106/mL), progressive motility (%), total motility, morphology (normal forms %), CASA sperm motility parameters (VCL, VSL, VAP, BCF, ALH, LIN, STR) |
SO2 (31-101 μg/m3) | |||||||
NO2 (19.5–53.5 μg/m3) | |||||||
Jurewicz, et al. 2013 [24] | Poland, Lodz | – | 277 men from infertility clinic | 32 ± 4.6 | Cross-sectional | 1 PAH metabolite in urine 1-OHP (0.02–2.03 μg/g creat) | Volume, concentration (× 106/mL), motility (%), atypical sperm (%),static sperm (%), CASA parameters: VAP, VSL, VCL, BCF, ALH, DFI (%) |
Song, et al. 2013 [22] | China, Pearl River Delta | Jul 2010 to Aug 2011 | 53 men from infertility clinic | Cross-sectional | 16 PAHs in blood | Concentration (× 106/mL), volume, motility (grade A, grade B, grade C) | |
Han, et al. 2011 [31] | China, Chongqing | Dec 2007 | 232 men from Chongqing Family Planning Research Institute | 31.89 ± 5.53 | Cross-sectional | 4 PAH metabolites in urine | Apoptotic marker (Annexin V−/PI− spermatozoa %, Annexin V+/PI− spermatozoa %, PI+ spermatozoa %, comet parameters (tail%, tail length, TDM) |
1-OHP (μg/g creatinine) | |||||||
9-OHPh (μg/g creatinine) | |||||||
2-OHFIu (μg/g creatinine) | |||||||
2-OHNa (μg/g creatinine) | |||||||
Hammoud, et al. 2010 [20] | USA, Salt Lake City | 2002 to 2007 | 1699 semen analyses and 877 inseminations | 32.8 ± 6.57 | Ecological study | PM2.5 (5-24 μg/m3) | Motility, concentration (×106/mL), morphology (normal forms %) |
Hansen, et al. 2010 [19] | USA, Wake County, Shelby County and Galveston County | 2002 to 2004 | 228 men, partners of pregnant women | 18–40 | Cross-sectional | O3 (2–83.2 ppb) | Concentration (× 106/mL), count, morphology (normal forms %), abnormal morphology (%), abnormal head (%), abnormal midsection (%), abnormal tail (%), cytoplasmic droplets (%), CMA (%), DFI (%) |
PM2.5 (2.1–62.7 μg/m3) | |||||||
Xia, et al. 2009a [28] | China, Nanjing | March 2004 to Jul 2007 | 513 infertile men and 273 fertile men as controls | 28.65 ± 4.51 for infertile males and 29.32 ± 4.51 for controls | Cross-sectional | 4 PAH metabolites in urine | Volume, concentration (×106/mL), sperm number per ejaculum, sperm motility |
1-N (μg/g creat) | |||||||
2-N(μg/g creat) | |||||||
1-OHP (μg/g creat) | |||||||
2-OHF(μg/g creat) | |||||||
Xia, et al. 2009b [29] | China, Nanjing | March 2004 to Jul 2007 | 542 men | No information -based on abstract | Cross-sectional | 4 PAH metabolites in urine | Volume, concentration (× 106/mL), sperm number per ejaculum, sperm motility |
1-N (μg/g creat) | |||||||
2-N(μg/g creat) | |||||||
1-OHP (μg/g creat) | |||||||
2-OHF(μg/g creat) | |||||||
Rubes, et al. 2007 [32] | Czech, Teplice | Sep 1995 to Sep 1997 | 36 men | 19–21 | Longitudinal study | SO2 (μg/m3) | %DFI, GSTM1 genotype |
NOx (μg/m3) | |||||||
PM10 (16.9–76.3 μg/m3) | |||||||
PAH (21.4–221.9 ng/m3) | |||||||
Sokol, et al. 2006 [18] | USA, Los Angeles | Jan 1996 to Dec 1998 | 48 sperm donors from sperm donor bank | 19–35 mean 25.3 ± 4.7 | Retrospective cohort study | O3 (1.69–47.51 ppb) | Concentration (×106/mL), motility (×106) |
NO2 (9.04–79.80 ppb) | |||||||
CO (0.37–3.86 ppm) | |||||||
PM10 (6.84–101.88 μg/m3) | |||||||
Rubes, et al. 2005 [26] | Czech, Teplice | Sep 1995 to Sep 1997 | 36 men | 19–21 | Prospective cohort study | SO2 (μg/m3) | Count, concentration (×106/mL), volume, motility (%), normal sperm head morphology (%), normal morphology (%), straight line velocity, curvilinear velocity, linearity, %DFI |
NOx (μg/m3) | |||||||
PM10 (μg/m3) | |||||||
PAH (ng/m3) | |||||||
Selevan, et al. 2000 [17] | Czech, Teplice, Prachatice | 1993 to 1994 | 408 men from Hygiene Station | 18 | Prospective cohort study | PM10 (3.1–832.0 μg/m3) | Semen volume, concentration (×106/mL), total count, motility (%), total progressive, normal morphology (%), normal heads (%), VSL, VCL, LIN, sperm chromatin structure |
SO2 (1–697.9 μg/m3) | |||||||
CO (0–5.50 mg/m3) | |||||||
NOx (0–367.20 μg/m3) | |||||||
Robbins, et al. 1999 [33] | Czech, Teplice, Prachatice | Subset of 32 men | No information -based on abstract | Prospective cohort study | No information-based on abstract | Sperm aneuploidy | |
Occupational exposure | |||||||
Calogero, et al. 2011 [37] | Italy | 1.) 15June to 15July 2.) 1 to 31Jan | 36 men working at motorway tollgates; 32 unexposed men | 28–47 37.1 ± 5.5 | Cross-sectional | NOx (μg/m3) | LH, FSH, T, sperm concentration (×106/mL), total count, total motility (%), progressive motility (%), normal forms (%), sperm chromatin integrity, DFI (%) |
SOx (μg/m3) | |||||||
Boggia, et al. 2009 [38] | Italy | 2000 to 2004 | 307 men working at motorway | 23–57 mean 37.16 | Cross-sectional | NO2 (μg/m3) | FSH, LH, T, sperm count, motility (%), morphology, |
Guven, et al. 2008 [36] | Turkey | – | 38 men working at motorway and 35 men working at office as a control group | 35.2 ± 6.4 (study group) and 33.7 ± 6.7 (control group) | Cross-sectional | Traffic pollutants mainly the diesel | Concentration (×106/mL), motility, morphology |
De Rosa, et al. 2003 [39] | Italy | Jan2000 to Jan2002 | 85 men working at motorway and 85 control men randomly selected; | 38.6 ± 0.8 (study group) and 39.6 ± 0.7 (control group) | Cross-sectional | CO (9-27 mg/m3) | FSH, LH, T, sperm count, volume, motility, morphology, sperm membrane function, forward progression, sperm kinetics: VSL, VCL, LIN, ALH, |
NO (58–398 mg/m3) | |||||||
SO (9–27 μg/m3) | |||||||
Pb (0.9–4.2 μg/m3) |
Summary of collected data
Environmental exposure to air pollutants
Main semen parameters (motility, morphology, sperm concentration)
CASA parameters
DNA fragmentation
Sperm aneuploidy
Occupational exposure to air pollutants
Main semen parameters (motility, morphology, sperm concentration)
CASA parameters
DNA fragmentation
Level of reproductive hormones
Discussion
Outcome | Air pollution | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PM10 | PM2,5 | Pb, Cd | NOx | SOx | PAHs | O3 | CO | Ehoust partciles - diesel | |
Volume | Santi 2016 + ↑ Zhou 2014 - Rubes 2007 - Rubes 2005 - | Santi 2016 - | Zhou 2014 - Rubes 2007 - Rubes 2005 - | Zhou 2014 - Rubes 2007 - Rubes 2005 - | Song 2013 - Han 2011 - Rubes 2007 - Jurewicz 2013 + ↑ | ||||
Concentration (×106/mL) | Santi 2016 - Zhou 2014 + ↑ Rubes 2007 - Rubes 2005 - Wu 2016 + ↓ Sokol 2006 - | Santi 2016- Wu 2016 + ↓ Hammound 2010 - Hansen 2010 - | Zhou 2014 - Rubes 2007 - Rubes 2005 - Sokol 2006 - Calogero 2011 + ↓ | Zhou 2014 - Rubes 2007 - Rubes 2005 - Calogero 2011 + ↓ | Song 2013 - Han 2011 - Rubes 2007 - Xia 2009b + ↓ | Hansen 2010 - Sokol 2006 + ↓ | Sokol 2006 - | ||
Sperm count | Santi 2016 - Sokol 2006 - Rubes 2005 - Wu 2006 + ↓ | Santi 2016 + ↑ Wu 2016 + ↓ Hansen 2010 - | Sokol 2006 - Rubes 2005 - Calogero 2011 + ↓ Boggia 2009 - | Rubes 2005 - Calogero 2011 + ↓ | Han 2011 - Xia 2009b + ↓ | Hansen 2010 - | Sokol 2006 - | Guven 2008 + ↓ | |
Morphology (% of sperm with normal morphology) (%) | Santi 2016 + ↑ Zhou 2014 + ↓ Rubes 2007 - Selevan 2000 + ↓ Radwan 2016 + ↓ | Santi 2016 - Hammound 2010 - Hansen 2010 – Radwan 2016 + ↓ | Zhou 2014 + ↓ Rubes 2007 - Selevan 2000 + ↓ Calogero 2011 + ↓ Boggia 2009 – Radwan 2016 + ↓ | Zhou 2014 + ↓ Rubes 2007 - Selevan 2000 + ↓ Calogero 2011 + ↓ Radwan 2016 + ↓ | Han 2011 – Rubes 2007 – Jurewicz 2013 + ↓ | Hansen 2010 – Radwan 2016 + ↓ | Selevan 2000 + ↓ | Guven 2008 + ↓ | |
Progressive motility (%) | Santi 2016 - Wu 2016 - Zhou 2014 - Selevan 2000 + ↓ | Santi 2016 - Wu 2016 - | Zhou 2014 - Selevan 2000 + ↓ Calogero 2011 + ↓ | Zhou 2014 - Selevan 2000 + ↓ Calogero 2011 + ↓ | Selevan 2000 + ↓ | ||||
Total motility (%) | Santi 2016 – Wu 2016 - Zhou 2014 - Rubes 2007 – Sokol 2006 - Rubes 2005 - Selevan 2000 + ↓ | Santi 2016 – Wu 2016 - Hammound 2010 + ↓ | De Rosa 2003 + ↓ | Zhou 2014 - Rubes 2007 - Sokol 2006 - Rubes 2005 - Selevan 2000 + ↓ Calogero 2011 + ↓ Boggia 2009 + ↓ De Rosa 2003 + ↓ | Zhou 2014 - Rubes 2007 - Rubes 2005 -Selevan 2000 + ↓ Calogero 2011 + ↓ De Rosa 2003 + ↓ | Song 2013 + Han 2011 - Rubes 2007 - Jurewicz 2013 + ↑ | Sokol 2006 - | Sokol 2006 -Selevan 2000 + ↓ De Rosa 2003 + ↓ | Guven 2008 + ↓ |
Sperm DNA damage | Rubes 2007 + ↑ Rubes 2005 + Zhou 2014 + ↑ Selevan 2000 + Rawdan 2016 + ↓ | Hansen 2010 - Radwan 2016 - | Rubes 2007 + ↑ Rubes 2005 + Zhou 2014 + ↑ Selevan 2000 + Calogero 2011 + ↓ Radwan 2016 - De Rosa 2003 + ↓ | Rubes 2007 + ↑ Rubes 2005 + Zhou 2014 + ↑ Selevan 2000 + Calogero 2011 + ↑ Radwan 2016 – De Rosa 2003 + ↓ | Rubes 2007 + ↑ Rubes 2005 + Han 2011 + ↑ Jurewicz 2013 + | Hansen 2010 - Sokol 2006 + ↑ | Selevan2000 + Rawdan 2016 - | ||
Sperm aneuploidy | Jurewicz 2015 + ↑ | Jurewicz 2015 + ↑ | Robbins 1999 + ↑ | Radwan 2015 + ↑ | |||||
Reproductive hormones | Radwan 2016 + ↑ | Radwan 2016 + ↑ | De Rosa 2003 - | Calogero 2011 - Boggia 2009 - De Rosa 2003 - | Calogero 2011 - De Rosa 2003 - | De Rosa 2003 - Radwan 2016 + ↑ |
Adjustment for confounders
Source | Exposure assessment | Outcome measured | Confounders | Statistical analysis | Main faindings | Limitations | Strengths |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Santi, et al. 2016 [25] | PM10 (μg/m3) | Volume, concentration (× 106/mL), total number, typical forms (%), atypical forms (%), progressive motility (%), non-progressive motility (%), total motility (%), leucocytes | Temperature, humidity | Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression models | PM2.5 was directly related to total sperm number (p = 0.001); PM10 was directly related to semen volume (p < 0.001) and typical forms (p < 0.001), inversely related to atypical forms (p < 0.001) | No information about smoking; Daily PM exposure registered through the monitoring network of the quality of the air for the province of Madena; the relationship between environmental PM and semen quality was evaluated irrespective of the life-style and risk factors of each men | The cohort is highly representative of the entire population; Choosing the coldest season of the year in this area (the possible negative influence of high ambient temp. on sperm quality was excluded); |
PM2.5 (μg/m3) | |||||||
Wu, et al. 2016 [27] | PM10 (μg/m3) | Concentration(×106/mL), sperm count, total motility (%), progressive motility (%), | Age, BMI, ethnic, education, smoking, drinking, abstinence, season, average ambient temperature | Multivariate linear mixed models | PM2.5 was inversely associated with sperm concentration (β = −0.20; (95%CI: − 0.34, − 0.07) and sperm count (β = − 0.22; 95%CI: − 0.35, − 0.08); PM10 was inversely associated with sperm concentration and count (p < 0.05) | The used of ambient PM exposures as a proxy for individual exposures; No investigation of the association between exposure and sperm morphology; the results cannot be directly generalized to populations in which PM exposure levels are too low; Participants from infertility clinic | Big sample size; A wide concentration range of PM exposure; the use of IDW interpolation to more precisely estimate individual PM exposure; the non-linear exposure-response relationships |
PM2.5 (μg/m3) | |||||||
Radwan, et al. 2016 [23] | PM10 | Concentration (× 106/mL), motility (%), sperm with abnormal morphology (%), DFI(%), HDS(%), CASA parameters: VSL, VCL, LIN; FSH, E2, T | Age, smoking, temperature (men from 90 days), past disease, time of sexual abstinence, season | Multivariate linear regression | Exposure to air pollutants (PM10, PM2,5, SO2, NOx, CO) increased the abnormalities in sperm morphology (p = 0.0002, p = 0.0001, p = 0.0001, p = 0.01, p = 0.0001, respectively); Negative association were found between air pollutants and testosterone levels (p < 0.05); There were a positive associations between PM10 and PM2,5 and HDS (p = 0.002, p = 0.0001, respectively) | participants from an infertility clinic; single semen sample; exposure levels assessed by considering the ZIP code of each participants; | Assessment of many different semen parameters, reproductive hormones levels and sperm chromatin structure; detailed questionnaire information allowed for control confounding factors in the analysis; cotinine measured in saliva to verified smoking status; |
PM2.5 | |||||||
SO2 | |||||||
CO | |||||||
NOx | |||||||
Jurewicz, et al. 2015 [34] | PM10 (μg/m3) | Sperm aneuploidy, sperm concentration (×106/mL), total motility (%), abnormal morphology (%) | Age, smoking, drinking, temperature, season, past disease, abstinence interval, distance from monitoring station, concentration, motility, morphology, PM10, SO2 | multivariate analysis | There was a positive association between exposure to PM2.5 and disomy Y (p = 0.001), sex chromosome disomy (p = 0.05), disomy of chromosome 21 (p = 0.03); xposure to PM10 was associated with disomy 21 (p = 0.02) | Exposure levels assessed by considering the ZIP code of each participants; participants from an infertility clinic; single semen sample; | Many confounders included to the analysis; cotinine measured in saliva to verified smoking status; detailed questionnaire information allowed for control confounding factors in the analysis, |
PM2.5 (μg/m3) | |||||||
O3 (μg/m3) | |||||||
SO2 (μg/m3) | |||||||
CO (μg/m3) | |||||||
NOx (μg/m3) | |||||||
Radwan, et al. 2015 [35] | 1 PAH metabolite in urine (1-OHP) | Sperm aneuploidy, sperm concentration (× 106/mL), total motility (%), normal sperm morphology (%), | Abstinence, age, smoking, season, past disease, | Multivariate analysis | Positive associations between level of 1-OHP in urine and total sex-chromosome disomy (p = 0.03); An increase in the frequency of disomy 18 was related to the level of 1-OHP in urine (p = 0.03) | participants from an infertility clinic; single semen sample; one biomarker of PAHs exposure- 1-hydroksypyrene (1-OHP) | cotinine measured in saliva to verified smoking status; detailed questionnaire information allowed for control confounding factors in the analysis, |
Zhou, et al. 2014 [21] | PM10 (μg/m3) | Volume, concentration (×106/mL), progressive motility (%), total motility, morphology (normal forms %), CASA sperm motility parameters (VCL, VSL, VAP, BCF, ALH, LIN, STR) | Age, education, smoking, drinking, BMI, abstinence, season, | Multivariate regression models | PM10, SO2, NO2 were negatively associated with a normal sperm morphology percentage (p < 0.001); there were inverse associations between sperm VCL and VSL value and PM10, SO2, NO2 (p < 0.001); PM10 was positively associated with sperm concentration (p = 0.031) | Used of monitoring data for the study sites to measure ambient air pollution; the measurement and prediction of PM10, SO2, NO2 exposure were performed outside; the used only a single semen sample | Big sample size; Exposure to air pollutants in both urban and rural areas; The use of mean concentration of each pollutant during the 90 days before sampling; Many confounders including to the analyses |
SO2 (μg/m3) | |||||||
NO2 (μg/m3) | |||||||
Jurewicz, et al. 2013 [24] | 1 PAH metabolite in urine (1-OHP) | Volume, concentration (×106/mL), motility (%), atypical sperm (%),static sperm (%), DFI (%), CASA parameters: VAP, VSL, VCL, BCF, ALH, | Age, smoking, past disease, season, sexual abstinence, | Multivariate regression models | A positive associations were observed between the level of 1-OHP in urine and sperm neck abnormalities (p = 0.001) and a negative between the semen volume (p = 0.014), %motility (p = 0.0001) and %static sperm (p = 0.018); | Participants from an infertility clinic; single urine and semen sample; one biomarker of PAHs exposure- 1-hydroksypyrene (1-OHP) | cotinine measured in saliva to verified smoking status; detailed questionnaire information allowed for control confounding factors in the analysis, |
Song, et al. 2013 [22] | 16 PAHs in blood | Concentration (× 106/mL), volume, motility (grade A, grade B, grade C) | – | The Pearson correlation analysis | Significant correlations between PAHs in blood and semen motility were observed (p < 0.01) | Small sample size; participants from infertility clinic; No investigation of the association between PAH exposure and semen morphology; | 16 PAH metabolites as a biomarkers of exposure to PAH; |
Han, et al. 2011 [31] | 4 PAH metabolites in urine | Apoptotic marker (Annexin V−/PI− spermatozoa %, Annexin V+/PI− spermatozoa %, PI+ spermatozoa %, comet parameters (tail%, tail length, TDM) | Age, BMI, abstinence, smoking, drinking, grilled and smoked foods ingestions | Multivariate regression models | 2-OHNa levels were associated with increased comet parameters including tail% (β = 13.26% per log unit 2-OHNa; 95%CI: 7.97–18.55), tail length (β = 12.25; 95%CI: 0.01–24.52) and tail distribution (β = 7.55; 95%CI: 1.28–18.83); 1-OHP was associated with increased tail% (β = 5.32; 95%CI: 0.47–10.17); urinary PAH metabolites were associated with decreased vital Annexin V negative sperm count; | Single urine sample; the use of biomarkers didn’t allow for determination of primary exposure sources; | Urinary PAH metabolites as biomarkers of PAH exposure; Assessing 4 metabolites individually; Participants recruited only during the winter when air pollution is higher); many confounders including in the analyses; |
1-OHP | |||||||
9-OHPh | |||||||
2-OHFIu | |||||||
2-OHNa | |||||||
Hammoud, et al. 2010 [20] | PM2.5 (μg/m3) | Motility, concentration (×106/mL), morphology (normal forms %) | Temperature, season | Multivariate regression models | PM2.5 was negatively associated with sperm motility 2 months and 3 months following the recording of the PM2.5 values (p = 0.010 and p = 0.044, respectively) | Participants from andrology laboratory; occupational exposure didn’t include in the analysis | Repeated semen samples; big sample size; The analyses of daily levels of PM2.5 over the 5 years; |
Hansen, et al. 2010 [19] | O3 (ppb) | Concentration (× 106/mL), count, morphology (normal forms %), abnormal morphology (%), abnormal head (%), abnormal midsection (%), abnormal tail (%), cytoplasmic droplets (%), CMA (%), DFI (%) | Age, abstinence, education levels, smoking, season, temperature | Multivariate regression models | Exposures to O3 or PM2.5 at least below the current National Ambient Air Quality Standards were not associated with decrements in sperm outcomes. | Small sample size; single semen sample; | Many confounders including in the analysis; |
PM2.5 (μg/m3) | |||||||
Xia, et al. 2009a [28] | 4 PAH metabolites in urine | Volume, concentration (×106/mL), sperm number per ejaculum, sperm motility | Age, abstinence time, | Logistic regression analysis | Men with higher urinary concentrations of 1-OHP, 2-OHP and Sum PAH metabolites were more likely to have idiopathic male infertility (p for trend = 0.034) | Single semen sample; No investigation of the association between PAH exposure and semen morphology; | Big sample size; Urinary PAH metabolites as biomarkers of PAH exposure; men with idiopathic infertility were divided into ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’ semen quality group |
1-N | |||||||
2-N | |||||||
1-OHP | |||||||
2-OHF | |||||||
Xia, et al. 2009b [29] | 4 PAH metabolites in urine | Volume, concentration (× 106/mL), sperm number per ejaculum, sperm motility | No information-based on abstract | No information-based on abstract | Men with higher 1-OHP (assessed as quintiles) were likely to have below-reference sperm concentration and sperm number per ejaculum. | No information-based on abstract | No information-based on abstract |
1-N | |||||||
2-N | |||||||
1-OHP | |||||||
2-OHF | |||||||
Rubes, et al. 2007 [32] | SO2 (μg/m3) | %DFI GSTM1 genotype | Smoking | Mixed models | Association between GSTM1 null genotype and increased %DFI (beta = 0.309; 95% CI: 0.129, 0.489). Furthermore, GSTM1 null men also showed higher %DFI in response to exposure to intermittent high air pollution (beta = 0.487; 95% CI: 0.243, 0.731) | Small sample size; Single semen sample; only one confounder included to the analysis; | Novel evidence for a gene-environment interaction between GSTM1 and air pollution; |
NOX (μg/m3) | |||||||
PM10 (μg/m3) | |||||||
PAH (ng/m3) | |||||||
Sokol, et al. 2006 [18] | O3 (ppb) | Concentration (×106/mL), motility (×106) | Temperature, seasonality, age of donation, date of birth | Linear mixed-effects model | Negative association between ozone and sperm concentration (p < 0.01); | Small sample size; No investigation of the association between air pollution exposure and semen morphology; | Repeated semen samples; |
NO2 (ppb) | |||||||
CO (ppm) | |||||||
PM10 (μg/m3) | |||||||
Rubes, et al. 2005 [26] | SO2 (μg/m3) | Count, concentration (× 106/mL), volume, motility (%), normal sperm head morphology (%), normal morphology (%), straight line velocity, curvilinear velocity, linearity, DFI% | Smoking, drinking, caffeine, abstinence, fever, briefs, | Mixed models for repeated measures | Significant association between high air pollution and %DFI (β = 0.19; 95%CI: 0.02–0.36); Other semen measures were not associated with air pollution; | Small sample size; | Urine sample were assayed for cotinine to confirm self-reported smoking status; Blood sample was collected for analysis of lead, mercury and cadmium as an indication of possible exposure to metals; Air pollution categorized as low and high; semen samples classify as a “winter” or “summer” sample |
NOx (μg/m3) | |||||||
PM10 (μg/m3) | |||||||
PAH (ng/ m3) | |||||||
Selevan, et al. 2000 [17] | PM10 (μg/m3) | Semen volume, concentration (×106/mL), total count, motility (%), total progressive, normal morphology (%), normal heads (%), VSL, VCL, LIN, sperm chromatin structure | Abstinence, wearing briefs, caffeine, high fever, work and hobbies with metal, work and hobbies with solvents, season | Multivariate regression models | Significant associations between medium air pollution and %motile sperm (β = −8.12; 95%CI: −12.95, −3.30); between medium air pollution and progressive motility (β = −0.15; 95%CI: −0.30, −0.01); Negative association between medium and high air pollution and %normal morphology (β = − 0.42; 95%CI: − 0.69, − 0.14 and β = − 0.84; 95%CI: − 1.15, − 0.53); High air pollution was associated with parameters of sperm motion – VSL, VCL, LIN (p < 0,005) | Single semen sample; Data about air pollution from the air monitoring program; | Air pollution categorized as low, medium and high; Many confounders included to the analysis |
SO2 (μg/m3) | |||||||
CO (mg/m3) | |||||||
NOx (μg/m3) | |||||||
Robbins, et al. 1999 [33] | SO2 | aneuploidy | Alcohol, caffeine intake, fever, laboratory variables | Poisson regression modeling | The sex chromosomal aneuploidy YY was associated with exposure to high air pollution IRR = 5.25, 95%CI: 2.5,11.0 | No information-based on abstract | No information-based on abstract |
Occupational exposure | |||||||
Calogero, et al. 2011 [37] | NOx (μg/m3) | LH, FSH, T, sperm concentration (×106/mL), total sperm count, total motility, progressive motility (%), normal form (%), sperm chromatin integrity; DFI (%) | Age, length of occupational exposure, smoking | Multivariate regression models; | Motorway tollgate workers had a significantly higher %spermatozoa with damage chromatin (p < 0.001) compared with controls, likewise the %spermatozoa with fragmented DNA; late sign of apoptosis was also significantly higher in tollgate workers (p < 0.001); sperm concentration, total sperm count, total and progressive motility, and normal form were significantly lower in tollgate workers compared with controls (p < 0.05) | Small sample size; | blood levels of MHb, SHb, COHb, Pb as a biological biomarkers of environmental pollution; the air pollution was measured with specific analyzers 24 h/day for 30 days during summer; |
SOx (μg/m3) | |||||||
Boggia, et al. 2009 [38] | NO2 (μg/m3) | FSH, LH, T, sperm count, motility, morphology, | Fuel combustion gases | Negative association between men occupationally exposed to NO2 and total motility (p < 0.05) | No individual estimations of exposure; | Cross-sectional design | |
Guven, et al. 2008 [36] | diesel | Concentration (×106/mL), motility, morphology | – | student’s t-test, Mann-Whitney U-test; | The differences regarding the abnormal sperm count and motility were significant between the study group and control group (p = 0.002 and p = 0.003, respectively); the ratio of sperm cells with normal morphology was significantly lower in the study group (p = 0.001) | Small sample size; No individual estimations of exposure; | Cross-sectional design |
De Rosa, et al. 2003 [39] | CO (mg/m3) | FSH, LH, T, sperm count, volume, motility, morphology, sperm membrane function, forward progression, sperm kinetics: VSL, VCL, LIN, ALH, | student’s t-test; linear regression analysis | Total motility, forward progression, functional test and sperm kinetic were significantly lower in tollgate workers vs. controls (p < 0.0001) | Small sample size; No individual estimations of exposure | blood levels of MHb, SHb, COHb, Pb, Zn as a biological biomarkers of environmental pollution; | |
NO (mg/m3) | |||||||
SO (μg/m3) | |||||||
Pb (μg/m3) |