Display options
Cite
Wang CT, Liang L, Witz C, et al. Optimized protocol for cryopreservation of human eggs improves developmental competence and implantation of resulting embryos. J Ovarian Res. 2013;6(1):15doi: 10.1186/1757-2215-6-15.
Wang, C. T., Liang, L., Witz, C., Williams, D., Griffith, J., Skorupski, J., Haddad, G., Gill, J., & Wang, W. (2013). Optimized protocol for cryopreservation of human eggs improves developmental competence and implantation of resulting embryos. Journal of ovarian research, 6(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/1757-2215-6-15
Wang, Cassie T, et al. "Optimized protocol for cryopreservation of human eggs improves developmental competence and implantation of resulting embryos." Journal of ovarian research vol. 6,1 (2013): 15. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1757-2215-6-15
Wang CT, Liang L, Witz C, Williams D, Griffith J, Skorupski J, Haddad G, Gill J, Wang W. Optimized protocol for cryopreservation of human eggs improves developmental competence and implantation of resulting embryos. J Ovarian Res. 2013 Feb 13;6(1):15. doi: 10.1186/1757-2215-6-15. PMID: 23406718; PMCID: PMC3577428.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

J Ovarian Res. 2013 Feb 13;6(1):15. doi: 10.1186/1757-2215-6-15.

Optimized protocol for cryopreservation of human eggs improves developmental competence and implantation of resulting embryos.

Journal of ovarian research

Cassie T Wang, Lifeng Liang, Craig Witz, Dan Williams, Jason Griffith, Josh Skorupski, Ghassan Haddad, Jimmy Gill, Weihua Wang

Affiliations

  1. Houston Fertility Institute/New Houston Health, Houston, TX, USA. [email protected].

PMID: 23406718 PMCID: PMC3577428 DOI: 10.1186/1757-2215-6-15

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Successful egg cryopreservation has many potential benefits to a variety of patients. However, a superior standard protocol describing all aspects of oocyte cryopreservation has not yet been identified. Oocyte cryopreservation is still a technical challenge for many infertility clinics. To maintain satisfactory clinical outcomes, there is a need to develop an easy to use, yet efficient laboratory protocol. The present study was designed to examine if human embryos resulting from eggs frozen with an optimized vitrification protocol have similar developmental competence as those from fresh eggs.

METHODS: Twenty recipients received donated eggs vitrified with a protocol in which short exposure time to the vitrification solution was used and 23 recipients received donated eggs and 6 patients had their own eggs vitrified with a modified protocol in which long exposure time to the vitrification solution was used. After warming, egg survival, fertilization, cleavage, blastocyst formation, clinical pregnancy and implantation rates were compared. The developmental competence of eggs vitrified with the optimized protocol was further compared with fresh eggs donated from the same donors.

RESULTS: There was no difference in the oocyte survival, fertilization, cleavage, clinical pregnancy or implantation rates between the short and long protocol groups. However, blastocyst formation rate was significantly (P < 0.001) higher in the long protocol group (50.8%) than that in short protocol group (26.5%), resulting in more blastocysts being transferred and frozen. When frozen eggs vitrified with long protocol and fresh eggs from the same donors (12) were compared in 39 recipients, no differences were observed in terms of fertilization (86.4 vs 80.1%), blastocyst formation (50.0 vs 59.2%), clinical pregnancy (63.2 vs 60.0%) and implantation (41.7 vs 44.7%) rates. Four out of 6 patients had ongoing pregnancy after transfer of embryos from their own frozen eggs with a 46.2% implantation rate.

CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that blastocyst development is an appropriate measure for egg survival after cryopreservation and frozen eggs have similar developmental potential as fresh eggs if they are frozen with an optimized method.

References

  1. Cryo Letters. 2011 Sep-Oct;32(5):410-4 - PubMed
  2. Reprod Biomed Online. 2009 Jun;18(6):769-76 - PubMed
  3. Fertil Steril. 2006 Jan;85(1):108-11 - PubMed
  4. Reprod Biomed Online. 2012 Feb;24(2):186-90 - PubMed
  5. Theriogenology. 1994;42(7):1193-204 - PubMed
  6. Fertil Steril. 2008 Jun;89(6):1657-64 - PubMed
  7. Hum Reprod. 1999 Dec;14(12):3077-9 - PubMed
  8. Fertil Steril. 2009 Nov;92(5):1706-15 - PubMed
  9. Hum Reprod. 2009 Sep;24(9):2114-23 - PubMed
  10. Hum Reprod. 2011 Apr;26(4):782-90 - PubMed
  11. Mol Reprod Dev. 1992 Oct;33(2):210-4 - PubMed
  12. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008 Oct;17(4):520-3 - PubMed
  13. Fertil Steril. 2013 Jan;99(1):37-43 - PubMed
  14. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005 Sep;11(3):300-8 - PubMed
  15. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008 May;16(5):608-10 - PubMed
  16. Fertil Steril. 2007 Aug;88(2):497.e1-4 - PubMed
  17. Fertil Steril. 2011 Mar 1;95(3):928-35 - PubMed
  18. Theriogenology. 2007 Jan 1;67(1):81-9 - PubMed
  19. Theriogenology. 2007 Jan 1;67(1):73-80 - PubMed
  20. Hum Reprod. 2012 Jul;27(7):2160-8 - PubMed
  21. Fertil Steril. 2006 Jul;86(1):70-80 - PubMed
  22. Cryobiology. 2007 Jun;54(3):281-9 - PubMed
  23. Hum Reprod. 2001 Mar;16(3):411-6 - PubMed
  24. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2001;4(3):152-7 - PubMed
  25. Lancet. 1986 Apr 19;1(8486):884-6 - PubMed
  26. Mol Reprod Dev. 1991 Aug;29(4):373-8 - PubMed
  27. Fertil Steril. 2011 Aug;96(2):264-8 - PubMed
  28. Reprod Biomed Online. 2011 Jan;22(1):83-7 - PubMed
  29. Fertil Steril. 2009 Aug;92(2):520-6 - PubMed
  30. Cryobiology. 1990 Jun;27(3):247-68 - PubMed
  31. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007 Jan;14(1):72-9 - PubMed
  32. J Reprod Fertil. 1989 Nov;87(2):479-83 - PubMed
  33. Anim Reprod Sci. 2008 Jul;106(3-4):265-73 - PubMed
  34. Reprod Biomed Online. 2011 Sep;23(3):341-6 - PubMed
  35. Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;19 Suppl 3:29-34 - PubMed
  36. Hum Reprod. 2010 Jan;25(1):66-73 - PubMed
  37. Fertil Steril. 2010 Feb;93(2):467-74 - PubMed
  38. Fertil Steril. 2011 Aug;96(2):277-85 - PubMed
  39. Hum Reprod Update. 2012 Sep-Oct;18(5):536-54 - PubMed
  40. Hum Reprod. 1995 May;10(5):1184-8 - PubMed
  41. Fertil Steril. 2006 Dec;86(6):1786-8 - PubMed
  42. Fertil Steril. 2011 May;95(6):1996-2000 - PubMed
  43. Hum Reprod. 2006 Feb;21(2):512-7 - PubMed
  44. Biol Reprod. 2011 Nov;85(5):884-94 - PubMed
  45. Reprod Biomed Online. 2006 Jun;12(6):730-6 - PubMed
  46. Reprod Biomed Online. 2011 Sep;23(3):298-306 - PubMed
  47. Fertil Steril. 2010 Feb;93(2):391-6 - PubMed

Publication Types