A single “universal warming protocol” for vitrified human embryos: a randomized controlled study

A comprehensive review and update on human fertility cryopreservation methods and tools

The broad conceptualization of fertility preservation and restoration has become already a major concern in the modern western world since a large number of individuals often face it in the everyday life. Driven by different health conditions and/or social reasons, a variety of patients currently rely on routinely and non-routinely applied assisted reproductive technologies, and mostly on the possibility to cryopreserve gametes and/or gonadal tissues for expanding their reproductive lifespan. This review embraces the data present in human-focused literature regarding the up-to-date methodologies and tools contemporarily applied in IVF laboratories' clinical setting of the oocyte, sperm, and embryo cryopreservation and explores the latest news and issues related to the optimization of methods used in ovarian and testicular tissue cryopreservation.

A monocentric analysis of the efficacy of extracellular cryoprotectants in unfrozen solutions for cleavage stage embryos

BACKGROUND

In the absence of international guidelines indicating the usage of vitrification rather than slow-freezing, the study aim was to analyze a large cohort of slow-frozen/thawed embryos to produce a rationale supporting the standardization of IVF cryopreservation policy.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis included 4779 cleavage stage embryos cryopreserved by slow-freezing/thawing from September 2009 to April 2017 at a single Center. Biological and clinical outcomes of three different commercial kits adopted sequentially, i.e. Vitrolife Cleave Kit® from Vitrolife (kit 1) vs. K-SICS-5000 Kit® and K-SITS-5000 Kit® from Cook Medical (kit 2) and Freeze/Thaw 1™ Kit® from Vitrolife (kit 3) were collected and compared in the light of cryoprotectants composition.

RESULTS

Kit 3 compared to kit 1 and kit 2 showed significantly (P < 0.001) higher embryo survival (79.9% vs. 75.6 and 68.1%, respectively) and frozen embryo replacement (91.5% vs. 86.5 and 83.3%, respectively) rates, and significantly (P < 0.001) lower blastomere degeneration rate (41.5% vs. 43.6 and 52.4%, respectively). No significant difference for clinical outcomes was observed among kits. Only a slight positive trend was observed for kit 3 vs. kit 1 and kit 2 on delivery rate per thawing cycle (7.12% vs. 4.19 and 4.51%, respectively; P < 0.058) and live birth rate (3.07% vs. 2.59 and 1.93%, respectively, P < 0.069). Thawing solutions of kit 3 were similar to those of any warming protocol.

CONCLUSIONS

A defined concentration of extracellular cryoprotectants in thawing/warming solutions had a beneficial effect on the embryo cryosurvival rate. Results could provide the rationale for the adoption of a single standardized warming protocol.