Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine

The Korean Society for Reproductive Medicine (대한생식의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Blastocyst formation in vitrified-warmed preimplantation embryos derived from vitrified-warmed oocytes in a mouse model

  • Yeon Hee Hong (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Byung Chul Jee (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2023.09.02
  • Accepted : 2024.01.16
  • Published : 2024.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to use a mouse model to investigate the blastocyst formation rate in vitrified-warmed embryos derived from vitrified-warmed oocytes. Methods: Metaphase II oocytes obtained from BDF1 mice were vitrified and warmed, followed by fertilization with epididymal sperm. On day 3, a total of 176 embryos, at either the eight-cell or the morula stage, were vitrified-warmed (representing group 1). For group 2, 155 embryos at the same developmental stages were not vitrified, but rather were directly cultured until day 5. Finally, group 3 included day-5 blastocysts derived from fresh oocytes, which served as fresh controls. The primary outcome measured was the rate of blastocyst formation per day-3 embryo at the eight-cell or morula stage. Results: The rates of blastocyst formation per day-3 embryo were comparable between groups 1 and 2, at 64.5% and 69.7%, respectively (p>0.05). The formation rates of good-quality blastocysts (expanded, hatching, or hatched) were also similar for groups 1 and 2, at 35.5% and 43.2%, respectively (p>0.05). For the fresh oocytes (group 3), the blastocyst formation rate was 75.5%, which was similar to groups 1 and 2. However, the rate of good-quality blastocyst formation in group 3 was 57.3%, significantly exceeding those of group 1 (p=0.001) and group 2 (p=0.023). Conclusion: Regarding developmental potential to the blastocyst stage, vitrified-warmed day-3 embryos originating from vitrified-warmed oocytes demonstrated comparable results to non-vitrified embryos from similar oocytes. These findings indicate that day-3 embryos derived from vitrified-warmed oocytes can be effectively cryopreserved without incurring cellular damage.

Keywords

References

  1. Argyle CE, Harper JC, Davies MC. Oocyte cryopreservation: where are we now? Hum Reprod Update 2016;22:440-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmw007
  2. Sciorio R. Cryopreservation of human embryos and oocytes for fertility preservation in cancer and non cancer patients: a mini review. Gynecol Endocrinol 2020;36:381-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/09513590.2020.1719402
  3. Clark NA, Swain JE. Oocyte cryopreservation: searching for novel improvement strategies. J Assist Reprod Genet 2013;30:865-75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-013-0028-8
  4. Practice Committees of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Mature oocyte cryopreservation: a guideline. Fertil Steril 2013; 99:37-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.09.028
  5. Smith GD, Serafini PC, Fioravanti J, Yadid I, Coslovsky M, Hassun P, et al. Prospective randomized comparison of human oocyte cryopreservation with slow-rate freezing or vitrification. Fertil Steril 2010;94:2088-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.12.065
  6. Levi Setti PE, Porcu E, Patrizio P, Vigiliano V, de Luca R, d'Aloja P, et al. Human oocyte cryopreservation with slow freezing versus vitrification: results from the National Italian Registry data, 2007-2011. Fertil Steril 2014;102:90-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.03.052
  7. Cil AP, Bang H, Oktay K. Age-specific probability of live birth with oocyte cryopreservation: an individual patient data meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2013;100:492-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.04.023
  8. Levi-Setti PE, Patrizio P, Scaravelli G. Evolution of human oocyte cryopreservation: slow freezing versus vitrification. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes 2016;23:445-50. https://doi.org/10.1097/MED.0000000000000289
  9. Cobo A, Garrido N, Pellicer A, Remohi J. Six years' experience in ovum donation using vitrified oocytes: report of cumulative outcomes, impact of storage time, and development of a predictive model for oocyte survival rate. Fertil Steril 2015;104:1426-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.08.020
  10. Garcia-Velasco JA, Domingo J, Cobo A, Martinez M, Carmona L, Pellicer A. Five years' experience using oocyte vitrification to preserve fertility for medical and nonmedical indications. Fertil Steril 2013;99:1994-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.02.004
  11. Goldman KN, Noyes NL, Knopman JM, McCaffrey C, Grifo JA. Oocyte efficiency: does live birth rate differ when analyzing cryopreserved and fresh oocytes on a per-oocyte basis? Fertil Steril 2013;100:712-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.04.040
  12. Potdar N, Gelbaya TA, Nardo LG. Oocyte vitrification in the 21st century and post-warming fertility outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed Online 2014;29:159-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.03.024
  13. Ata B, Chian RC, Tan SL. Cryopreservation of oocytes and embryos for fertility preservation for female cancer patients. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2010;24:101-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2009.11.007
  14. Cobo A, Kuwayama M, Perez S, Ruiz A, Pellicer A, Remohi J. Comparison of concomitant outcome achieved with fresh and cryopreserved donor oocytes vitrified by the Cryotop method. Fertil Steril 2008;89:1657-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.05.050
  15. Fu X, Liu X, Li J, Zhang M, Jiang J, Chen Q, et al. An eight year experience of autologous oocyte vitrification for infertile patients owing to unavailability of sperm on oocyte retrieval day. Front Med (Lausanne) 2021;8:663287.
  16. Youm J, Kim SK, Jee BC, Kim SH. Embryonic survival, development and cryoinjury of repeatedly vitrified mouse preimplantation embryos. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2017;217:66-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.08.027
  17. Saiz N, Plusa B. Early cell fate decisions in the mouse embryo. Reproduction 2013;145:R65-80. https://doi.org/10.1530/REP-12-0381
  18. de Sousa Lopes SMC, Mummery CL. Differentiation in early development. In: Lanza R, Gearhart J, Hogan B, Melton D, Pedersen R, Donnall Thomas E, et al. editors. Essentials of stem cell biology. 2nd ed. Elsevier; 2009. p.117-29.
  19. Ghandy N, Karimpur Malekshah AA. Which stage of mouse embryos is more appropriate for vitrification? Int J Fertil Steril 2017;10:357-62.
  20. Nottola SA, Coticchio G, Sciajno R, Gambardella A, Maione M, Scaravelli G, et al. Ultrastructural markers of quality in human mature oocytes vitrified using cryoleaf and cryoloop. Reprod Biomed Online 2009;19 Suppl 3:17-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60280-5
  21. Ghetler Y, Skutelsky E, Ben Nun I, Ben Dor L, Amihai D, Shalgi R. Human oocyte cryopreservation and the fate of cortical granules. Fertil Steril 2006;86:210-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.12.061
  22. Jia QP, Sun WQ. Perspective: cryopreservation of human oocytes and the 'carryover' effect on early embryo development. Cryo Letters 2021;42:120-8.
  23. Fathi R, Valojerdi MR, Yazdi PE, Ebrahimi B, Alipour H, Hassani F. Development of 4-cell mouse embryos after re-vitrification. Cryobiology 2012;64:23-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cryobiol.2011.11.003
  24. Li J, Xiong S, Zhao Y, Li C, Han W, Huang G. Effect of the re-vitrification of embryos at different stages on embryonic developmental potential. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2021;12:653310.
  25. Buderatska N, Gontar J, Ilyin I, Lavrinenko S, Petrushko M, Yurchuk T. Does human oocyte cryopreservation affect equally on embryo chromosome aneuploidy? Cryobiology 2020;93:33-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cryobiol.2020.03.002
  26. Lei T, Guo N, Liu JQ, Tan MH, Li YF. Vitrification of in vitro matured oocytes: effects on meiotic spindle configuration and mitochondrial function. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2014;7:1159-65.