Cargando…
A monocentric analysis of the efficacy of extracellular cryoprotectants in unfrozen solutions for cleavage stage embryos
BACKGROUND: In the absence of international guidelines indicating the usage of vitrification rather than slow-freezing, the study aim was to analyze a large cohort of slow-frozen/thawed embryos to produce a rationale supporting the standardization of IVF cryopreservation policy. METHODS: This retros...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6815413/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31656205 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12958-019-0519-2 |
_version_ | 1783463174403522560 |
---|---|
author | Capodanno, Francesco Daolio, Jessica De Feo, Gaetano Falbo, Angela Morini, Daria Nicoli, Alessia Braglia, Luca Villani, MariaTeresa La Sala, Giovanni B. Parmegiani, Lodovico Aguzzoli, Lorenzo |
author_facet | Capodanno, Francesco Daolio, Jessica De Feo, Gaetano Falbo, Angela Morini, Daria Nicoli, Alessia Braglia, Luca Villani, MariaTeresa La Sala, Giovanni B. Parmegiani, Lodovico Aguzzoli, Lorenzo |
author_sort | Capodanno, Francesco |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In the absence of international guidelines indicating the usage of vitrification rather than slow-freezing, the study aim was to analyze a large cohort of slow-frozen/thawed embryos to produce a rationale supporting the standardization of IVF cryopreservation policy. METHODS: This retrospective analysis included 4779 cleavage stage embryos cryopreserved by slow-freezing/thawing from September 2009 to April 2017 at a single Center. Biological and clinical outcomes of three different commercial kits adopted sequentially, i.e. Vitrolife Cleave Kit® from Vitrolife (kit 1) vs. K-SICS-5000 Kit® and K-SITS-5000 Kit® from Cook Medical (kit 2) and Freeze/Thaw 1™ Kit® from Vitrolife (kit 3) were collected and compared in the light of cryoprotectants composition. RESULTS: Kit 3 compared to kit 1 and kit 2 showed significantly (P < 0.001) higher embryo survival (79.9% vs. 75.6 and 68.1%, respectively) and frozen embryo replacement (91.5% vs. 86.5 and 83.3%, respectively) rates, and significantly (P < 0.001) lower blastomere degeneration rate (41.5% vs. 43.6 and 52.4%, respectively). No significant difference for clinical outcomes was observed among kits. Only a slight positive trend was observed for kit 3 vs. kit 1 and kit 2 on delivery rate per thawing cycle (7.12% vs. 4.19 and 4.51%, respectively; P < 0.058) and live birth rate (3.07% vs. 2.59 and 1.93%, respectively, P < 0.069). Thawing solutions of kit 3 were similar to those of any warming protocol. CONCLUSIONS: A defined concentration of extracellular cryoprotectants in thawing/warming solutions had a beneficial effect on the embryo cryosurvival rate. Results could provide the rationale for the adoption of a single standardized warming protocol. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6815413 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68154132019-10-31 A monocentric analysis of the efficacy of extracellular cryoprotectants in unfrozen solutions for cleavage stage embryos Capodanno, Francesco Daolio, Jessica De Feo, Gaetano Falbo, Angela Morini, Daria Nicoli, Alessia Braglia, Luca Villani, MariaTeresa La Sala, Giovanni B. Parmegiani, Lodovico Aguzzoli, Lorenzo Reprod Biol Endocrinol Research BACKGROUND: In the absence of international guidelines indicating the usage of vitrification rather than slow-freezing, the study aim was to analyze a large cohort of slow-frozen/thawed embryos to produce a rationale supporting the standardization of IVF cryopreservation policy. METHODS: This retrospective analysis included 4779 cleavage stage embryos cryopreserved by slow-freezing/thawing from September 2009 to April 2017 at a single Center. Biological and clinical outcomes of three different commercial kits adopted sequentially, i.e. Vitrolife Cleave Kit® from Vitrolife (kit 1) vs. K-SICS-5000 Kit® and K-SITS-5000 Kit® from Cook Medical (kit 2) and Freeze/Thaw 1™ Kit® from Vitrolife (kit 3) were collected and compared in the light of cryoprotectants composition. RESULTS: Kit 3 compared to kit 1 and kit 2 showed significantly (P < 0.001) higher embryo survival (79.9% vs. 75.6 and 68.1%, respectively) and frozen embryo replacement (91.5% vs. 86.5 and 83.3%, respectively) rates, and significantly (P < 0.001) lower blastomere degeneration rate (41.5% vs. 43.6 and 52.4%, respectively). No significant difference for clinical outcomes was observed among kits. Only a slight positive trend was observed for kit 3 vs. kit 1 and kit 2 on delivery rate per thawing cycle (7.12% vs. 4.19 and 4.51%, respectively; P < 0.058) and live birth rate (3.07% vs. 2.59 and 1.93%, respectively, P < 0.069). Thawing solutions of kit 3 were similar to those of any warming protocol. CONCLUSIONS: A defined concentration of extracellular cryoprotectants in thawing/warming solutions had a beneficial effect on the embryo cryosurvival rate. Results could provide the rationale for the adoption of a single standardized warming protocol. BioMed Central 2019-10-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6815413/ /pubmed/31656205 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12958-019-0519-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Capodanno, Francesco Daolio, Jessica De Feo, Gaetano Falbo, Angela Morini, Daria Nicoli, Alessia Braglia, Luca Villani, MariaTeresa La Sala, Giovanni B. Parmegiani, Lodovico Aguzzoli, Lorenzo A monocentric analysis of the efficacy of extracellular cryoprotectants in unfrozen solutions for cleavage stage embryos |
title | A monocentric analysis of the efficacy of extracellular cryoprotectants in unfrozen solutions for cleavage stage embryos |
title_full | A monocentric analysis of the efficacy of extracellular cryoprotectants in unfrozen solutions for cleavage stage embryos |
title_fullStr | A monocentric analysis of the efficacy of extracellular cryoprotectants in unfrozen solutions for cleavage stage embryos |
title_full_unstemmed | A monocentric analysis of the efficacy of extracellular cryoprotectants in unfrozen solutions for cleavage stage embryos |
title_short | A monocentric analysis of the efficacy of extracellular cryoprotectants in unfrozen solutions for cleavage stage embryos |
title_sort | monocentric analysis of the efficacy of extracellular cryoprotectants in unfrozen solutions for cleavage stage embryos |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6815413/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31656205 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12958-019-0519-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT capodannofrancesco amonocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT daoliojessica amonocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT defeogaetano amonocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT falboangela amonocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT morinidaria amonocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT nicolialessia amonocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT braglialuca amonocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT villanimariateresa amonocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT lasalagiovannib amonocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT parmegianilodovico amonocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT aguzzolilorenzo amonocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT capodannofrancesco monocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT daoliojessica monocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT defeogaetano monocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT falboangela monocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT morinidaria monocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT nicolialessia monocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT braglialuca monocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT villanimariateresa monocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT lasalagiovannib monocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT parmegianilodovico monocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos AT aguzzolilorenzo monocentricanalysisoftheefficacyofextracellularcryoprotectantsinunfrozensolutionsforcleavagestageembryos |