Cargando…

Neonatal outcomes after the transfer of vitrified blastocysts: closed versus open vitrification system

BACKGROUND: Increasing evidence indicates that closed vitrification has been successfully used in the cryopreservation of human oocytes and embryos. Little information is available regarding the neonatal outcome of closed blastocysts vitrification. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effective...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Yuan, Zheng, Xiaoying, Yan, Jie, Qiao, Jie, Liu, Ping
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4225498/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24256633
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7827-11-107
_version_ 1782343520740179968
author Chen, Yuan
Zheng, Xiaoying
Yan, Jie
Qiao, Jie
Liu, Ping
author_facet Chen, Yuan
Zheng, Xiaoying
Yan, Jie
Qiao, Jie
Liu, Ping
author_sort Chen, Yuan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Increasing evidence indicates that closed vitrification has been successfully used in the cryopreservation of human oocytes and embryos. Little information is available regarding the neonatal outcome of closed blastocysts vitrification. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of blastocyst vitrification using a high-security closed vitrification system compared with an open vitrification system. METHODS: A total of 332 vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer cycles between April 2010 and May 2012 were analyzed retrospectively. The post-thaw survival rate, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate, and neonatal outcome were recorded. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the open vitrification group and the close vitrification group regarding the post-thaw survival rate (98% versus 95.8%), clinical pregnancy rate (47.6% versus 42.2%), implantation rate (42.9% versus 35.6%), and live birth rate (39.8% versus 32.1%). In total, 332 warming cycles produced 131 healthy babies. There were no significant differences in the mean gestational age, the birth weight, and the birth length between the two groups. No adverse neonatal outcomes were observed in the children born after the transfer of closed vitrified blastocysts compared with the transfer of open vitrified blastocysts. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that blastocyst vitrification using a closed vitrification device seems safe and effective with results comparable to those obtained through open vitrification.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4225498
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42254982014-11-11 Neonatal outcomes after the transfer of vitrified blastocysts: closed versus open vitrification system Chen, Yuan Zheng, Xiaoying Yan, Jie Qiao, Jie Liu, Ping Reprod Biol Endocrinol Research BACKGROUND: Increasing evidence indicates that closed vitrification has been successfully used in the cryopreservation of human oocytes and embryos. Little information is available regarding the neonatal outcome of closed blastocysts vitrification. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of blastocyst vitrification using a high-security closed vitrification system compared with an open vitrification system. METHODS: A total of 332 vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer cycles between April 2010 and May 2012 were analyzed retrospectively. The post-thaw survival rate, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate, and neonatal outcome were recorded. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the open vitrification group and the close vitrification group regarding the post-thaw survival rate (98% versus 95.8%), clinical pregnancy rate (47.6% versus 42.2%), implantation rate (42.9% versus 35.6%), and live birth rate (39.8% versus 32.1%). In total, 332 warming cycles produced 131 healthy babies. There were no significant differences in the mean gestational age, the birth weight, and the birth length between the two groups. No adverse neonatal outcomes were observed in the children born after the transfer of closed vitrified blastocysts compared with the transfer of open vitrified blastocysts. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that blastocyst vitrification using a closed vitrification device seems safe and effective with results comparable to those obtained through open vitrification. BioMed Central 2013-11-21 /pmc/articles/PMC4225498/ /pubmed/24256633 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7827-11-107 Text en Copyright © 2013 Chen et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Chen, Yuan
Zheng, Xiaoying
Yan, Jie
Qiao, Jie
Liu, Ping
Neonatal outcomes after the transfer of vitrified blastocysts: closed versus open vitrification system
title Neonatal outcomes after the transfer of vitrified blastocysts: closed versus open vitrification system
title_full Neonatal outcomes after the transfer of vitrified blastocysts: closed versus open vitrification system
title_fullStr Neonatal outcomes after the transfer of vitrified blastocysts: closed versus open vitrification system
title_full_unstemmed Neonatal outcomes after the transfer of vitrified blastocysts: closed versus open vitrification system
title_short Neonatal outcomes after the transfer of vitrified blastocysts: closed versus open vitrification system
title_sort neonatal outcomes after the transfer of vitrified blastocysts: closed versus open vitrification system
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4225498/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24256633
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7827-11-107
work_keys_str_mv AT chenyuan neonataloutcomesafterthetransferofvitrifiedblastocystsclosedversusopenvitrificationsystem
AT zhengxiaoying neonataloutcomesafterthetransferofvitrifiedblastocystsclosedversusopenvitrificationsystem
AT yanjie neonataloutcomesafterthetransferofvitrifiedblastocystsclosedversusopenvitrificationsystem
AT qiaojie neonataloutcomesafterthetransferofvitrifiedblastocystsclosedversusopenvitrificationsystem
AT liuping neonataloutcomesafterthetransferofvitrifiedblastocystsclosedversusopenvitrificationsystem