Cargando…

Different Impacts of Cryopreservation in Endothelial and Epithelial Ovarian Cells

The aim of our laboratory-based study was to investigate the extent of delayed-onset cell death after cryopreservation in endothelial and epithelial cell lines of ovarian origin. We found differences in percentages of vital cells directly after warming and after cultivation for 48 to 72 h. A granulo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Marschalek, Julian, Hager, Marlene, Wanderer, Sophie, Ott, Johannes, Frank, Maria, Schneeberger, Christian, Pietrowski, Detlef
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10418832/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37569601
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms241512225
_version_ 1785088362030301184
author Marschalek, Julian
Hager, Marlene
Wanderer, Sophie
Ott, Johannes
Frank, Maria
Schneeberger, Christian
Pietrowski, Detlef
author_facet Marschalek, Julian
Hager, Marlene
Wanderer, Sophie
Ott, Johannes
Frank, Maria
Schneeberger, Christian
Pietrowski, Detlef
author_sort Marschalek, Julian
collection PubMed
description The aim of our laboratory-based study was to investigate the extent of delayed-onset cell death after cryopreservation in endothelial and epithelial cell lines of ovarian origin. We found differences in percentages of vital cells directly after warming and after cultivation for 48 to 72 h. A granulosa cell line of endothelial origin (KGN) and an epithelial cell line (OvCar-3) were used. In both DMSO-containing and DMSO-free protocols, significant differences in vitality rates between the different cell lines when using open and closed vitrification could be shown (DMSO-containing: KGN open vs. OvCar open, p = 0.001; KGN closed vs. OvCar closed, p = 0.001; DMSO-free: KGN open vs. OvCar open, p = 0.001; KGN closed vs. OvCar closed, p = 0.031). Furthermore, there was a marked difference in the percentage of vital cells immediately after warming and after cultivation for 48 to 72 h; whereas the KGN cell line showed a loss of cell viability of 41% using a DMSO-containing protocol, the OvCar-3 cell loss was only 11% after cultivation. Using a DMSO-free protocol, the percentages of late-onset cell death were 77% and 48% for KGN and OvCar-3 cells, respectively. Our data support the hypothesis that cryopreservation-induced damage is cell type and cryoprotective agent dependent.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10418832
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104188322023-08-12 Different Impacts of Cryopreservation in Endothelial and Epithelial Ovarian Cells Marschalek, Julian Hager, Marlene Wanderer, Sophie Ott, Johannes Frank, Maria Schneeberger, Christian Pietrowski, Detlef Int J Mol Sci Communication The aim of our laboratory-based study was to investigate the extent of delayed-onset cell death after cryopreservation in endothelial and epithelial cell lines of ovarian origin. We found differences in percentages of vital cells directly after warming and after cultivation for 48 to 72 h. A granulosa cell line of endothelial origin (KGN) and an epithelial cell line (OvCar-3) were used. In both DMSO-containing and DMSO-free protocols, significant differences in vitality rates between the different cell lines when using open and closed vitrification could be shown (DMSO-containing: KGN open vs. OvCar open, p = 0.001; KGN closed vs. OvCar closed, p = 0.001; DMSO-free: KGN open vs. OvCar open, p = 0.001; KGN closed vs. OvCar closed, p = 0.031). Furthermore, there was a marked difference in the percentage of vital cells immediately after warming and after cultivation for 48 to 72 h; whereas the KGN cell line showed a loss of cell viability of 41% using a DMSO-containing protocol, the OvCar-3 cell loss was only 11% after cultivation. Using a DMSO-free protocol, the percentages of late-onset cell death were 77% and 48% for KGN and OvCar-3 cells, respectively. Our data support the hypothesis that cryopreservation-induced damage is cell type and cryoprotective agent dependent. MDPI 2023-07-31 /pmc/articles/PMC10418832/ /pubmed/37569601 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms241512225 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Communication
Marschalek, Julian
Hager, Marlene
Wanderer, Sophie
Ott, Johannes
Frank, Maria
Schneeberger, Christian
Pietrowski, Detlef
Different Impacts of Cryopreservation in Endothelial and Epithelial Ovarian Cells
title Different Impacts of Cryopreservation in Endothelial and Epithelial Ovarian Cells
title_full Different Impacts of Cryopreservation in Endothelial and Epithelial Ovarian Cells
title_fullStr Different Impacts of Cryopreservation in Endothelial and Epithelial Ovarian Cells
title_full_unstemmed Different Impacts of Cryopreservation in Endothelial and Epithelial Ovarian Cells
title_short Different Impacts of Cryopreservation in Endothelial and Epithelial Ovarian Cells
title_sort different impacts of cryopreservation in endothelial and epithelial ovarian cells
topic Communication
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10418832/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37569601
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms241512225
work_keys_str_mv AT marschalekjulian differentimpactsofcryopreservationinendothelialandepithelialovariancells
AT hagermarlene differentimpactsofcryopreservationinendothelialandepithelialovariancells
AT wanderersophie differentimpactsofcryopreservationinendothelialandepithelialovariancells
AT ottjohannes differentimpactsofcryopreservationinendothelialandepithelialovariancells
AT frankmaria differentimpactsofcryopreservationinendothelialandepithelialovariancells
AT schneebergerchristian differentimpactsofcryopreservationinendothelialandepithelialovariancells
AT pietrowskidetlef differentimpactsofcryopreservationinendothelialandepithelialovariancells