Cryopreservation of human oocytes and embryos is a necessary tool in assisted reproduction treatment that leads to an increased cumulative outcome while decreasing costs. Vitrification is a cryopreservation technique that leads to a glass-like solidification, with rapid cooling of cells or tissues. Nowadays vitrification is claimed to be the future of cryopreservation of human embryos due to improved survival rates and clinical outcomes. This study was conducted at a university clinic to assess the safety and efficiency of vitrification of human zygotes as a routine procedure. A total of 849 pronuclear-stage (PN) zygotes were vitrified between March 2004 and July 2006. During this period, 103 cycles of cryopreserved embryo transfer were completed. In total, 339 PN zygotes were thawed resulting in an 89% survival rate (302 PN zygotes). The mean number of embryos per transfer was 2.2. The pregnancy rate obtained was three times higher (36.9%) than that obtained with the slow-rate freezing method (10.2%) used previously in the same centre. In conclusion, vitrification of human zygotes at the pronuclear stage seems to be a successful and reliable method with favourable outcomes and can be recommended as a routine technique for cryopreservation of human embryos.
STUDY QUESTION What are outcome and procedural differences when using the semi-automated closed Gavi® device versus the manual open Cryotop® method for vitrification of pronuclear (2PN) stage oocytes within an IVF program? SUMMARY ANSWER A semi-automated closed vitrification method gives similar clinical results as compared to an exclusively manual, open system but higher procedure duration and less staff convenience. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY A semi-automated closed vitrification device has been introduced to the market, however, little evaluation of its performance in a clinical setting has been conducted so far. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This prospective, randomised, open non-inferiority trial was conducted at three German IVF centers (10/2017–12/2018). Randomization was performed on day of fertilization check, stratified by center and by indication for vitrification (surplus 2PN oocytes in the context of a fresh embryo transfer (ET) cycle or ‘freeze-all’ of 2PN oocytes). PARTICIPANT/MATERIAL, SETTING, METHODS The study population included subfertile women, aged 18–40 years, undergoing IVF or ICSI treatment after ovarian stimulation, with 2PN oocytes available for vitrification. The primary outcome was survival rate of 2PN oocytes at first warming procedure in a subsequent cycle and non-inferiority of 2PN survival was to be declared if the lower bound 95% CI of the mean difference in survival rate excluded a difference larger than 9.5%; secondary, descriptive outcomes included embryo development, pregnancy and live birth rate, procedure time and staff convenience. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE The randomised patient population consisted of 149 patients, and the per-protocol population (patients with warming of 2PN oocytes for culture and planned ET) was 118 patients. The survival rate was 94.0% (±13.5) and 96.7% (±9.7) in the Gavi® and the Cryotop® group (weighted mean difference −1.6%, 95% CI −4.7 to 1.4, P = 0.28), respectively, indicating non-inferiority of the Gavi® vitrification/warming method for the primary outcome. Embryo development and the proportion of top-quality embryos was similar in the two groups, as were the pregnancy and live birth rate. Mean total procedure duration (vitrification and warming) was higher in the Gavi® group (81 ± 39 min vs 47 ± 15 min, mean difference 34 min, 95% CI 19 to 48). Staff convenience assessed by eight operators in a questionnaire was lower for the Gavi® system. The majority of respondents preferred the Cryotop® method because of practicality issues. LIMITATIONS, REASON FOR CAUTION The study was performed in centers with long experience of manual vitrification, and the relative performance of the Gavi® system as well as the staff convenience may be higher in settings with less experience in the manual procedure. Financial costs of the two procedures were not measured along the trial. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS With increasing requirements for standardization of procedures and tissue safety, a semi-automated closed vitrification method may constitute a suitable alternative technology to the established manual open vitrification method given the equivalent clinical outcomes demonstrated herein. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS The trial received no direct financial funding. The Gavi® instrument, Gavi® consumables and staff training were provided for free by the distributor (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) during the study period. The manufacturer of the Gavi® instrument had no influence on study protocol, study conduct, data analysis, data interpretation or manuscript writing. J.H. has received honoraria and/or non-financial support from Ferring, Merck and Origio. G.G. has received honoraria and/or non-financial support from Abbott, Ferring, Finox, Gedeon Richter, Guerbet, Merck, MSD, ObsEva, PregLem, ReprodWissen GmbH and Theramex. The remaining authors have no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03287479. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE 19 September 2017. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT 10 October 2017.
The introduction of vitrification has a measurable impact on the efficacy of an IVF program. However, this effect is not large despite the impressively higher cryo-survival rates with vitrification. The "true" net efficacy effect of introducing 2PN vitrification in an IVF program will, in real life, be lower due to patients not having surplus 2PN oocytes available for freezing and later transfer.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.