Skripsi

Ultrastruktur Spermatozoa Pasca Kriopreservasi pada Spermatozoa Normozoospermia vs Astenozoospermia dengan Menggunakan Scanning Electron Microscope = Ultrastructure of Spermatozoa Post Cryopreservation in Normozoospermia vs Asthenozoospermia Using Scanning Electron Microscope.

Latar Belakang Infertilitas laki-laki merupakan salah satu penyebab kegagalan kehamilan, dengan kontribusi sekitar 30% dari seluruh kasus infertilitas. Teknologi reproduksi berbantu (TRB) seperti intra uterine insemination (IUI), in vitro fertilization (IVF) dan intra cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) menggunakan kriopreservasi spermatozoa sebagai metode penyimpanan. Proses kriopreservasi dapat menyebabkan kerusakan ultrastruktur spermatozoa yang memengaruhi kualitas dan motilitas, terutama pada spermatozoa dengan kondisi astenozoospermia. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis perubahan ultrastruktur spermatozoa normozoospermia dan astenozoospermia pasca kriopreservasi menggunakan scanning electron microscope (SEM). Metode Penelitian analitik eksperimental pada sampel spermatozoa yang telah menjalani proses kriopreservasi. Ultrastruktur spermatozoa dianalisis dengan SEM dan penilaian abnormalitas ultrastruktur pada bagian kepala, midpiece, dan eko. Analisis data dilakukan dengan uji univariat dan uji bivariat untuk membandingkan rerata ultrastruktur spermatozoa antara kelompok normozoospermia dan astenozoospermia. Data dianalisis menggunakan Uji Fisher's exact dengan nilai kemaknaan p 0,05). Namun, terdapat kecenderungan tingkat abnormalitas ultrastruktur yang lebih tinggi pada kelompok astenozoospermia, terutama pada bagian ekor. Temuan umum meliputi kontur kepala tidak teratur, adanya tonjolan sitoplasmik, midpiece ireguler, serta ekor bengkok atau menggulung. Kesimpulan Proses kriopreservasi menyebabkan kerusakan ultrastruktur spermatozoa, terutama pada kelompok astenozoospermia dibandingkan normozoospermia. Tidak ditemukan bagian ultrastruktur spermatozoa yang secara konsisten paling terdampak setelah proses kriopreservasi, baik pada kondisi normozoospermia maupun astenozoospermia.
Kata Kunci: Infertilitas, Ultrastruktur spermatozoa, Kriopreservasi, Normozoospermia, Astenozoospermia, Scanning Electron Microscope


Background Male infertility is one of the causes of pregnancy failure, contributing to approximately 30% of all infertility cases. Assisted reproductive technologies (ART) such as intrauterine insemination (IUI), in vitro fertilization (IVF), and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) use sperm cryopreservation as a storage method. The processes of cryopreservation and thawing can cause morphological damage to spermatozoa, affecting their quality and motility—particularly in sperm with asthenozoospermia. However, studies investigating ultrastructural changes remain limited. This study aims to analyze and compare the ultrastructural changes of normozoospermic and asthenozoospermic spermatozoa after cryopreservation using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Method This was an analytical experimental study conducted on cryopreserved spermatozoa samples. The ultrastructure of spermatozoa was examined using SEM, and abnormalities were assessed in the head, midpiece, and tail regions. Data were analyzed using univariate and bivariate tests to compare ultrastructural differences between normozoospermic and asthenozoospermic groups. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher’s exact test, with a significance level of p < 0,05. Result No significant differences were found in the ultrastructural integrity between normozoospermic and asthenozoospermic spermatozoa after cryopreservation (p = 0,192; p > 0,05). However, descriptive analysis revealed a tendency toward higher ultrastructural abnormalities in the asthenozoospermic group, particularly in the tail region. Common findings included irregular head contours, cytoplasmic protrusions, irregular midpieces, and bent or coiled tails. Conclusion Cryopreservation causes ultrastructural damage to spermatozoa, with the asthenozoospermic group being more susceptible to damage than the normozoospermic group. No specific sperm region (head, midpiece, or tail) was consistently the most affected after cryopreservation in either group.
Keywords: Infertility, Spermatozoa ultrastructure, Cryopreservation, Normozoospermia, Asthenozoospermia, Scanning Electron Microscope