4.7 Article

Storage of human oocytes in the vapor phase of nitrogen

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 94, Issue 5, Pages 1903-1907

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.10.042

Keywords

Vapor-phase nitrogen; cross-contamination; liquid nitrogen; human oocytes

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of long-term vapor-phase nitrogen storage of vitrified human oocytes as a strategy for preventing the risk of cross-contamination due to direct contact with the liquid nitrogen (LN). Design: Prospective randomized study. Setting: Private infertility center, IVI, Valencia. Patient(s): Oocyte donors (n = 44) and recipients (n = 46). Intervention(s): Vitrification by the Cryotop method. Storage of vitrified oocytes in a vapor-phase nitrogen storage freezer and a traditional LN storage tank. Donation of the surviving oocytes and evaluation of fertilization, embryo development, and clinical results. Main Outcome Measure(s): Survival, fertilization, and cleavage rates. Embryo quality and clinical outcome. Result(s): Survival was 95.3% (vapor-phase nitrogen) and 94.5% (LN). Fertilization rates (73.1% and 71.7%) or cleavage on day 2 (95.6% and 94.7%), day 3 (84.5% and 79.9%), and blastocyst formation (54.7% and 53.9%) were similar between vapor-phase nitrogen and LN. Implantation, clinical, and ongoing pregnancy rates were similar for vapor-phase nitrogen (40.5%, 58.1%, and 48.8%, respectively) and LN groups (33.7%, 53.3%, and 46.6%, respectively). Conclusion(s): The vapor-phase nitrogen system permits the storage of oocytes vitrified, maintaining their potential to develop into competent embryos in a similar manner as those stored in a traditional LN freezer. This approach represents a practical alternative that prevents cross-contamination during the storage of vitrified samples. (Fertil Steril (R) 2010;94:1903-7. (C) 2010 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