4.7 Article

Meiotic spindle recovery is faster in vitrification of human oocytes compared to slow freezing

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 91, Issue 6, Pages 2399-2407

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.03.013

Keywords

Human oocyte; meiotic spindle; slow freezing; vitrification; temperature

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To investigate spindle behavior during and after slow freezing at room temperature (RT) and vitrification at different temperatures. Design: Randomized, comparative study. Setting: University hospital. Patient(s): Patients undergoing IVF treatment volunteered for the study and donated part of their supemumerary oocytes. Intervention(s): Metaphase II oocytes were divided into group A: slow freezing RT/thawing RT; group B: vitrification RT/warming RT; group C: vitrification RT/warming 37 degrees C; and group D: vitrification 37 degrees C/warming 37 degrees C. Spindle presence was evaluated at each step of the four procedures and in culture. Main Outcome Measure(s): Cumulative Spindle recovery rate comparing warming phase of the three vitrification groups and culture phase among the four groups. Result(s): During warming, the three vitrification groups showed a significantly fast spindle recovery rate compared to the thawing of the slow freezing group. A progressively significant fast cumulative recovery rate was observed in the three vitrification groups by increasing the number of phases at physiological temperature (hazard rate = 2.68; 95% confidence interval 1.71-4.02). Conclusions(s): The present study demonstrates that spindle recovery is faster in vitrification than in slow freezing. These data support a possible protective effect of vitrification/warming at 37 degrees C on the meiotic spindle structure and, therefore, on the subsequent clinical outcome of the procedure, although comparative clinical studies are needed. (Fertil Steril (R) 2009;91:2399-407. (C) 2009 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

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