4.3 Review

Safety and efficiency of oocyte vitrification

Journal

CRYOBIOLOGY
Volume 78, Issue -, Pages 119-127

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.cryobiol.2017.07.009

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

As the oocyte is the starting point for a new life, artificial reproductive technology (ART) techniques should not affect the (ultra) structural and functional integrity, or the developmental competence. Oocyte vitrification-one of the most significant achievements in human ART during the past decade should therefore be a safe and efficient technique. This review discusses the principles and developments of the existing and future techniques, applications possibilities and safety concerns. The broad range of vitrification media and devices that are currently available, show differences in their effects on the oocyte ultrastructure and preimplantation development. It is not yet fully decided whether this has an influence on the obstetric and neonatal outcome, since only limited information is available with different media and devices. For autologous oocytes, the obstetric and neonatal outcomes appear promising and comparable to pregnancies obtained with fresh oocytes. This however, is not the case for heterologous fresh or vitrified oocytes, where the immunological foreign foetus induces adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes. Besides the oocyte vitrification process itself, the effect of multiple stimulations (for oocyte banking or for oocyte donors), seems to influence the possibility to develop gynaecological cancers further in life. Automated vitrification warming should offer a consistent, cross-contamination free process that offers the highest safety level for the users. They should also produce more consistent results in survival, development and clinical pregnancies between different IVF clinics. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available