Effectiveness of Exercise Training on Male Factor Infertility: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.
Study Goal
The researchers aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) on male factor infertility and seminal markers of inflammation compared to other exercise interventions.
Results Summary
HIIT showed moderate effectiveness for improving pregnancy rate (RR = 4.63) and live birth rate (RR = 4.38) but ranked lower than other interventions like CET and MICT. It was also less effective for improving semen quality, oxidative stress, and inflammation markers compared to other training strategies.
Population
Fertile and infertile men (2641 participants across 7 trials).
Effective Dosage
Not specified
Duration
Not specified
Interactions
None mentioned
| Intervention | Direction | Endpoint | Population | Dosage | Impact | Claim # |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
combined aerobic and resistance training (CET) | increase | pregnancy rate | fertile and infertile men | relative risk [RR] = 27.81 | top-ranking interventions for pregnancy rate | #1 |
moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) | increase | pregnancy rate | fertile and infertile men | relative risk [RR] = 26.67 | top-ranking interventions for pregnancy rate | #2 |
resistance training (RT) | increase | pregnancy rate | fertile and infertile men | relative risk [RR] = 12.54 | top-ranking interventions for pregnancy rate | #3 |
high-intensity continuous training (HICT) | increase | pregnancy rate | fertile and infertile men | relative risk [RR] = 5.55 | top-ranking interventions for pregnancy rate | #4 |
high-intensity interval training (HIIT) | increase | pregnancy rate | fertile and infertile men | relative risk [RR] = 4.63 | top-ranking interventions for pregnancy rate | #5 |
moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) | increase | live birth rate | fertile and infertile men | relative risk [RR] = 10.05 | top-ranking interventions for live birth rate | #6 |
resistance training (RT) | increase | live birth rate | fertile and infertile men | relative risk [RR] = 4.92 | top-ranking interventions for live birth rate | #7 |
high-intensity interval training (HIIT) | increase | live birth rate | fertile and infertile men | relative risk [RR] = 4.38 | top-ranking interventions for live birth rate | #8 |
combined aerobic and resistance training (CET) | increase | live birth rate | fertile and infertile men | relative risk [RR] = 2.20 | top-ranking interventions for live birth rate | #9 |
high-intensity continuous training (HICT) | increase | live birth rate | fertile and infertile men | relative risk [RR] = 1.55 | top-ranking interventions for live birth rate | #10 |
combined aerobic and resistance training (CET) | increase | semen quality parameters | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #11 |
moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) | increase | semen quality parameters | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #12 |
high-intensity continuous training (HICT) | increase | semen quality parameters | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #13 |
resistance training (RT) | increase | semen quality parameters | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #14 |
high-intensity interval training (HIIT) | increase | semen quality parameters | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #15 |
combined aerobic and resistance training (CET) | increase | seminal markers of oxidative stress | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #16 |
moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) | increase | seminal markers of oxidative stress | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #17 |
high-intensity interval training (HIIT) | increase | seminal markers of oxidative stress | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #18 |
high-intensity continuous training (HICT) | increase | seminal markers of oxidative stress | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #19 |
resistance training (RT) | increase | seminal markers of oxidative stress | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #20 |
combined aerobic and resistance training (CET) | increase | seminal markers of inflammation | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #21 |
moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) | increase | seminal markers of inflammation | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #22 |
high-intensity interval training (HIIT) | increase | seminal markers of inflammation | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #23 |
resistance training (RT) | increase | seminal markers of inflammation | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #24 |
high-intensity continuous training (HICT) | increase | seminal markers of inflammation | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #25 |
combined aerobic and resistance training (CET) | increase | measures of body composition and VO | fertile and infertile men | - | significantly better at improving | #26 |
combined aerobic and resistance training (CET) | increase | male factor infertility | fertile and infertile men | - | highest probability of being the best approach | #27 |
CONTEXT: Mounting evidence from the literature suggests that different types of training interventions can be successful at improving several aspects of male reproductive function in both fertile and infertile populations. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of exercise training on male factor infertility and seminal markers of inflammation. DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed, CISCOM, Springer, Elsevier Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, PEDro, Ovid (Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO), Sport Discus, Orbis, CINAHL, Web of Science, ProQuest, and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that analyzed the impacts of selected types of exercise interventions on markers of male reproductive function and reproductive performance. STUDY SELECTION: A total of 336 records were identified, of which we included 7 trials reporting on 2641 fertile and infertile men in the systematic review and network meta-analysis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 1 (because this is a systematic review of RCTs). DATA EXTRACTION: The data included the study design, participant characteristics, inclusion and exclusion, intervention characteristics, outcome measures, and the main results of the study. RESULTS: The results of network meta-analysis showed that, compared with a nonintervention control group, the top-ranking interventions for pregnancy rate were for combined aerobic and resistance training (CET) (relative risk [RR] = 27.81), moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) (RR = 26.67), resistance training (RT) (RR = 12.54), high-intensity continuous training (HICT) (RR = 5.55), and high-intensity interval training (HIIT) (RR = 4.63). While the top-ranking interventions for live birth rate were for MICT (RR = 10.05), RT (RR = 4.92), HIIT (RR = 4.38), CET (RR = 2.20), and HICT (RR = 1.55). Also, with the following order of effectiveness, 5 training strategies were significantly better at improving semen quality parameters (CET > MICT > HICT > RT > HIIT), seminal markers of oxidative stress (CET > MICT > HIIT > HICT > RT), seminal markers of inflammation (CET > MICT > HIIT > RT > HICT), as well as measures of body composition and VO CONCLUSION: The review recommends that the intervention with the highest probability of being the best approach out of all available options for improving the male factor infertility was for CET.