4.7 Article

Slow controlled-rate freezing of sequentially cultured human blastocysts: an evaluation of two freezing strategies

Journal

HUMAN REPRODUCTION
Volume 20, Issue 10, Pages 2939-2945

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dei134

Keywords

blastocysts; cryopreservation; IVF; sequential culture; slow controlled-rate freezing

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: To optimize blastocyst cryopreservation, the prerequisite is to develop a better understanding of factors that influence their survival and implantation potential. Therefore, the aim of the present work was to evaluate, retrospectively, the outcome of blastocyst cryopreservation in a day 2/3 fresh embryo transfer programme. METHODS: Two different freezing strategies were compared: a first strategy (strategy A: 3007 blastocysts frozen) consisted of freezing those blastocysts that had at least a cavity; a second strategy (strategy B: 3831 blastocysts frozen) consisted of freezing only more advanced stage blastocysts with a good quality inner cell mass and trophectoderm. The outcome of cryopreservation, as related to the two different freezing strategies, was analysed. In addition, after freezing and thawing, we evaluated the influence of blastocyst developmental characteristics on immediate morphological survival and further development in vitro. RESULTS: The immediate morphological survival after thawing was higher for early blastocysts as compared to advanced and hatching blastocysts. The further developmental potential in vitro of thawed blastocysts was higher for advanced and hatching blastocysts as compared to early blastocysts. As a result, the percentage of deliveries, calculated as a percentage of started thawing cycle, and the percentage of children born, calculated as a percentage of embryos transferred, was not different for strategies A and B. CONCLUSION: The results clearly indicate that culture conditions and cryopreservation procedures of blastocysts need to be further improved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available