Display options
Cite
Sadeghzadeh Oskouei B, Pashaiasl M, Heidari MH, et al. Evaluation of Mouse Oocyte In Vitro Maturation Developmental Competency in Dynamic Culture Systems by Design and Construction of A Lab on A Chip Device and Its Comparison with Conventional Culture System. Cell J. 2016;18(2):205-13doi: 10.22074/cellj.2016.4315.
Sadeghzadeh Oskouei, B., Pashaiasl, M., Heidari, M. H., Salehi, M., Veladi, H., Ghaderi Pakdel, F., Shahabi, P., & Novin, M. G. (2016). Evaluation of Mouse Oocyte In Vitro Maturation Developmental Competency in Dynamic Culture Systems by Design and Construction of A Lab on A Chip Device and Its Comparison with Conventional Culture System. Cell journal, 18(2), 205-13. https://doi.org/10.22074/cellj.2016.4315
Sadeghzadeh Oskouei, Behnaz, et al. "Evaluation of Mouse Oocyte In Vitro Maturation Developmental Competency in Dynamic Culture Systems by Design and Construction of A Lab on A Chip Device and Its Comparison with Conventional Culture System." Cell journal vol. 18,2 (2016): 205-13. doi: https://doi.org/10.22074/cellj.2016.4315
Sadeghzadeh Oskouei B, Pashaiasl M, Heidari MH, Salehi M, Veladi H, Ghaderi Pakdel F, Shahabi P, Novin MG. Evaluation of Mouse Oocyte In Vitro Maturation Developmental Competency in Dynamic Culture Systems by Design and Construction of A Lab on A Chip Device and Its Comparison with Conventional Culture System. Cell J. 2016 Jul-Sep;18(2):205-13. doi: 10.22074/cellj.2016.4315. Epub 2016 May 30. PMID: 27540525; PMCID: PMC4988419.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Cell J. 2016 Jul-Sep;18(2):205-13. doi: 10.22074/cellj.2016.4315. Epub 2016 May 30.

Evaluation of Mouse Oocyte In Vitro Maturation Developmental Competency in Dynamic Culture Systems by Design and Construction of A Lab on A Chip Device and Its Comparison with Conventional Culture System.

Cell journal

Behnaz Sadeghzadeh Oskouei, Maryam Pashaiasl, Mohammad Hasan Heidari, Mohammad Salehi, Hadi Veladi, Firuz Ghaderi Pakdel, Parviz Shahabi, Marefat Ghaffari Novin

Affiliations

  1. Drug Applied Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
  2. Drug Applied Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran; Womens Reproductive Health Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
  3. Department of Anatomy and Biology, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  4. Cellular and Molecular Biology Research Centre, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
  5. Department of Electronic Engineering, Tabriz University, Tabriz, Iran.
  6. Department of Physiology, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran.
  7. Department of Physiology, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.

PMID: 27540525 PMCID: PMC4988419 DOI: 10.22074/cellj.2016.4315

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In conventional assisted reproductive technology (ART), oocytes are cultured in static microdrops within Petri dishes that contain vast amounts of media. However, the in vivo environment is dynamic. This study assesses in vitro oocyte maturation through the use of a new microfluidic device. We evaluate oocyte fertilization to the blastocyct stage and their glutathione (GSH) contents in each experimental group.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this experimental study, we established a dynamic culture condition. Immature oocytes were harvested from ovaries of Naval Medical Research Institute (NMRI) mice. Oocytes were randomly placed in static (passive) and dynamic (active) in vitro maturation (IVM) culture medium for 24 hours. In vitro matured oocytes underwent fertilization, after which we placed the pronucleus (PN) stage embryos in microdrops and followed their developmental stages to blastocyst formation after 3 days. GSH content of the in vitro matured oocytes was assessed by monochlorobimane (MCB) staining.

RESULTS: We observed significantly higher percentages of mature metaphase II oocytes (MII) in the passive and active dynamic culture systems (DCS) compared to the static group (P<0.01). There were significantly less mean numbers of germinal vesicle (GV) and degenerated oocytes in the passive and active dynamic groups compared to the static group (P<0.01). Fertilization and blastocyst formation rate in the dynamic systems were statistically significant compared to the static cultures (P<0.01). There was significantly higher GSH content in dynamically matured oocytes compared to statically matured oocytes (P<0.01).

CONCLUSION: Dynamic culture for in vitro oocyte maturation improves their developmental competency in comparison with static culture conditions.

Keywords: Glutathione; In Vitro Fertilization; In Vitro Oocyte Maturation; Lab-On-A-Chip Device; Microfluidics

References

  1. Arch Med Res. 2001 Nov-Dec;32(6):619-26 - PubMed
  2. Theriogenology. 2008 Jan 15;69(2):262-7 - PubMed
  3. J Anim Sci. 1968;27 Suppl 1:1-14 - PubMed
  4. Anal Chem. 2001 Dec 1;73(23):5645-50 - PubMed
  5. Mol Hum Reprod. 1996 Jul;2(7):507-12 - PubMed
  6. J Endocrinol. 2002 Feb;172(2):221-36 - PubMed
  7. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2005 Jul 14;3:28 - PubMed
  8. Anal Chem. 1998 Dec 1;70(23):4974-84 - PubMed
  9. Genes Dev. 1992 Jun;6(6):939-52 - PubMed
  10. J Reprod Fertil. 1995 Nov;105(2):331-8 - PubMed
  11. Theriogenology. 2009 Mar 15;71(5):836-48 - PubMed
  12. Reproduction. 2001 Mar;121(3):339-46 - PubMed
  13. Dev Dyn. 2009 Apr;238(4):950-5 - PubMed
  14. Mol Reprod Dev. 1995 Jun;41(2):133-9 - PubMed
  15. Electrophoresis. 2000 Jan;21(1):27-40 - PubMed
  16. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010 Apr;20(4):453-69 - PubMed
  17. Anal Chem. 2001 Aug 1;73(15):3656-61 - PubMed
  18. Biol Reprod. 2012 Mar 08;86(3):62 - PubMed
  19. Anal Chem. 2003 Apr 1;75(7):1671-5 - PubMed
  20. Theriogenology. 2008 Oct 1;70(6):1004-13 - PubMed
  21. Hum Reprod. 2010 Mar;25(3):613-22 - PubMed
  22. Iran Biomed J. 2015;19(1):23-8 - PubMed
  23. Biomed Microdevices. 2008 Jun;10(3):337-45 - PubMed
  24. Fertil Steril. 1989 May;51(5):896-900 - PubMed
  25. Reprod Biol. 2009 Mar;9(1):71-8 - PubMed
  26. Theriogenology. 2007 Sep 1;68 Suppl 1:S190-5 - PubMed
  27. Dev Genet. 1993;14(3):174-84 - PubMed
  28. Reprod Biomed Online. 2003 Jul-Aug;7(1):75-81 - PubMed
  29. Lab Chip. 2005 Jan;5(1):86-90 - PubMed
  30. Anal Chem. 2008 Sep 1;80(17):6500-7 - PubMed
  31. Hum Reprod Update. 2011 Jul-Aug;17(4):541-57 - PubMed
  32. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Jun 28;102(26):9206-11 - PubMed
  33. Methods Mol Biol. 2012;912:355-65 - PubMed
  34. Nature. 1979 Jan 25;277(5694):298-300 - PubMed
  35. Science. 2000 Nov 24;290(5496):1536-40 - PubMed
  36. Lab Chip. 2004 Jun;4(3):186-90 - PubMed

Publication Types