PDF herunterladen
Semin Reprod Med 2009; 27(6): 443-449
DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1241053
© Thieme Medical Publishers

The Efficacy and Safety of Human Oocyte Cryopreservation by Slow Cooling

Andrea Borini1 , Giovanni Coticchio1
  • 1Tecnobios Procreazione, Bologna, Italy
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
05. Oktober 2009 (online)

    Lizenzen und Reprints

ABSTRACT

Preservation at low temperatures is a practice that has found several applications in medicine and biotechnology. Several types of cells and tissues can be stored virtually indefinitely in liquid nitrogen (–196°C) and returned to physiological temperatures. However, phenomena occurring during cooling and warming may affect the structure and function of the stored material. To some extent, the use of substances with special protective properties, referred to as cryoprotective agents, may avoid this effect, but normally a fraction of the cryopreserved material suffers a partial or total loss of viability. In the context of human in vitro fertilization (IVF), for decades cryopreservation has been used to store different materials of reproductive function, mainly embryos at various developmental stages and spermatozoa. In recent times, the realm of cryopreservation has been expanded to also include fully grown unfertilized oocytes. The storage of oocytes offers obvious advantages, eluding legal and ethical problems that afflict, and sometimes make inapplicable, embryo cryopreservation. Until recently, technical and applicative advances of oocyte cryopreservation were inhibited by the preconception that the unique nature of this cell was an insurmountable obstacle to safe and efficient preservation at low-temperature storage. In fact, through the two alternative methodological approaches of controlled rate slow cooling and vitrification, oocyte cryopreservation has been developed both technically and clinically to a stage that is beginning to challenge the supremacy of embryo freezing as the preferred form of fertility preservation for the treatment of infertile couples. Although several questions remain to be answered as to whether oocyte cryopreservation can ensure adequate standards of efficacy and safety, there appears to be little doubt that in the near future oocyte cryopreservation will be recognized as an established form of IVF treatment.

KEYWORDS

Oocytes - cryopreservation - IVF - clinical efficacy - safety of cryopreservation

REFERENCES

  • 1 Paynter S J. A rational approach to oocyte cryopreservation.  Reprod Biomed Online. 2005;  10(5) 578-586
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Lassalle B, Testart J, Renard J P. Human embryo features that influence the success of cryopreservation with the use of 1,2 propanediol.  Fertil Steril. 1985;  44(5) 645-651
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Borini A, Bonu M A, Coticchio G, Bianchi V, Cattoli M, Flamigni C. Pregnancies and births after oocyte cryopreservation.  Fertil Steril. 2004;  82(3) 601-605
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Queenan Jr J T, Veeck L L, Toner J P, Oehninger S, Muasher S J. Cryopreservation of all prezygotes in patients at risk of severe hyperstimulation does not eliminate the syndrome, but the chances of pregnancy are excellent with subsequent frozen-thaw transfers.  Hum Reprod. 1997;  12(7) 1573-1576
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Jackowski S, Leibo S P, Maxur P. Glycerol permeabilities of fertilized and infertilized mouse ova.  J Exp Zool. 1980;  212 329-341
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Ducibella T. Biochemical and cellular insights into the temporal window of normal fertilization.  Theriogenology. 1998;  49(1) 53-65
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Fissore R A, Kurokawa M, Knott J, Zhang M, Smyth J. Mechanisms underlying oocyte activation and postovulatory ageing.  Reproduction. 2002;  124(6) 745-754
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Nottola S A, Macchiarelli G, Coticchio G et al.. Ultrastructure of human mature oocytes after slow cooling cryopreservation using different sucrose concentrations.  Hum Reprod. 2007;  22(4) 1123-1133
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Ghetler Y, Skutelsky E, Ben Nun I, Ben Dor L, Amihai D, Shalgi R. Human oocyte cryopreservation and the fate of cortical granules.  Fertil Steril. 2006;  86(1) 210-216
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Ozil J P, Huneau D. Activation of rabbit oocytes: the impact of the Ca2+ signal regime on development.  Development. 2001;  128(6) 917-928
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Jones A, Van Blerkom J, Davis P, Toledo A A. Cryopreservation of metaphase II human oocytes effects mitochondrial membrane potential: implications for developmental competence.  Hum Reprod. 2004;  19(8) 1861-1866
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Larman M G, Sheehan C B, Gardner D K. Calcium-free vitrification reduces cryoprotectant-induced zona pellucida hardening and increases fertilization rates in mouse oocytes.  Reproduction. 2006;  131(1) 53-61
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Battaglia D E, Goodwin P, Klein N A, Soules M R. Influence of maternal age on meiotic spindle assembly in oocytes from naturally cycling women.  Hum Reprod. 1996;  11(10) 2217-2222
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Gook D A, Osborn S M, Johnston W I. Cryopreservation of mouse and human oocytes using 1,2-propanediol and the configuration of the meiotic spindle.  Hum Reprod. 1993;  8(7) 1101-1109
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Gook D A, Osborn S M, Bourne H, Johnson W I. Fertilization of human oocytes following cryopreservation; normal karyotypes and absence of stray chromosomes.  Hum Reprod. 1994;  9(4) 684-691
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Mullen S F, Agca Y, Broermann D C, Jenkins C L, Johnson C A, Critser J K. The effect of osmotic stress on the metaphase II spindle of human oocytes, and the relevance to cryopreservation.  Hum Reprod. 2004;  19(5) 1148-1154
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Joly C, Bchini O, Boulekbache H, Testart J, Maro B. Effects of 1,2-propanediol on the cytoskeletal organization of the mouse oocyte.  Hum Reprod. 1992;  7(3) 374-378
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Johnson M H, Pickering S J. The effect of dimethylsulphoxide on the microtubular system of the mouse oocyte.  Development. 1987;  100(2) 313-324
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Coticchio G, De Santis L, Rossi G et al.. Sucrose concentration influences the rate of human oocytes with normal spindle and chromosome configurations after slow-cooling cryopreservation.  Hum Reprod. 2006;  21(7) 1771-1776
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Cobo A, Rubio C, Gerli S, Ruiz A, Pellicer A, Remohí J. Use of fluorescence in situ hybridization to assess the chromosomal status of embryos obtained from cryopreserved oocytes.  Fertil Steril. 2001;  75(2) 354-360
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Stachecki J J, Munné S, Cohen J. Spindle organization after cryopreservation of mouse, human, and bovine oocytes.  Reprod Biomed Online. 2004;  8(6) 664-672
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Cobo A, Pérez S, De los Santos M J, Zulategui J, Domingo J, Remohí J. Effect of different cryopreservation protocols on the metaphase II spindle in human oocytes.  Reprod Biomed Online. 2008;  17(3) 350-359
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Coticchio G, Sciajno R, Hutt K J et al.. Comparative analysis of the metaphase II spindle of human oocytes through polarized light and high performance confocal microscopy.  Fertil Steril. 2009;  , February 23. (Epub ahead of print)
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Borini A, Sciajno R, Bianchi V, Sereni E, Flamigni C, Coticchio G. Clinical outcome of oocyte cryopreservation after slow cooling with a protocol utilizing a high sucrose concentration.  Hum Reprod. 2006;  21(2) 512-517
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Levi Setti P E, Albani E, Novara P V, Cesana A, Morreale G. Cryopreservation of supernumerary oocytes in IVF/ICSI cycles.  Hum Reprod. 2006;  21(2) 370-375
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 De Santis L, Cino I, Rabellotti E et al.. Oocyte cryopreservation: clinical outcome of slow-cooling protocols differing in sucrose concentration.  Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;  14(1) 57-63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Parmegiani L, Cognigni G E, Bernardi S et al.. Freezing within 2 h from oocyte retrieval increases the efficiency of human oocyte cryopreservation when using a slow freezing/rapid thawing protocol with high sucrose concentration.  Hum Reprod. 2008;  23(8) 1771-1777
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Chen S U, Lien Y R, Chen H F, Chang L J, Tsai Y Y, Yang Y S. Observational clinical follow-up of oocyte cryopreservation using a slow-freezing method with 1,2-propanediol plus sucrose followed by ICSI.  Hum Reprod. 2005;  20(7) 1975-1980
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Boldt J, Tidswell N, Sayers A, Kilani R, Cline D. Human oocyte cryopreservation: 5-year experience with a sodium-depleted slow freezing method.  Reprod Biomed Online. 2006;  13(1) 96-100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Lucena E, Bernal D P, Lucena C, Rojas A, Moran A, Lucena A. Successful ongoing pregnancies after vitrification of oocytes.  Fertil Steril. 2006;  85(1) 108-111
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Gook D A, Edgar D H. Cryopreservation of the human female gamete: current and future issues.  Hum Reprod. 1999;  14(12) 2938-2940
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Edgar D H, Gook D A. How should the clinical efficiency of oocyte cryopreservation be measured?.  Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;  14(4) 430-435
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Edgar D H, Bourne H, Speirs A L, McBain J C. A quantitative analysis of the impact of cryopreservation on the implantation potential of human early cleavage stage embryos.  Hum Reprod. 2000;  15(1) 175-179
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Fabbri R, Porcu E, Marsella T, Rocchetta G, Venturoli S, Flamigni C. Human oocyte cryopreservation: new perspectives regarding oocyte survival.  Hum Reprod. 2001;  16(3) 411-416
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Bianchi V, Coticchio G, Distratis V, Di Giusto N, Flamigni C, Borini A. Differential sucrose concentration during dehydration (0.2 mol/l) and rehydration (0.3 mol/l) increases the implantation rate of frozen human oocytes.  Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;  14(1) 64-71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Edgar D H, Archer J, McBain J, Bourne H. Embryonic factors affecting outcome from single cryopreserved embryo transfer.  Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;  14(6) 718-723
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Land J A, Evers J L. What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? Defining outcome in ART: a Gordian knot of safety, efficacy and quality.  Hum Reprod. 2004;  19(5) 1046-1048
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Min J K, Breheny S A, MacLachlan V, Healy D L. What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? The singleton, term gestation, live birth rate per cycle initiated: the BESST endpoint for assisted reproduction.  Hum Reprod. 2004;  19(1) 3-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Pinborg A, Loft A, Ziebe S, Nyboe Andersen A. What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? Is there a single ‘parameter of excellence’?.  Hum Reprod. 2004;  19(5) 1052-1054
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Nyboe Andersen A, Gianaroli L, Nygren K G. European IVF-monitoring programme . Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2000. Results generated from European registers by ESHRE.  Hum Reprod. 2004;  19(3) 490-503
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Tiitinen A, Hydén-Granskog C, Gissler M. What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction?: The value of cryopreservation on cumulative pregnancy rates per single oocyte retrieval should not be forgotten.  Hum Reprod. 2004;  19(11) 2439-2441
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Germond M, Urner F, Chanson A, Primi M P, Wirthner D, Senn A. What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction?: The cumulated singleton/twin delivery rates per oocyte pick-up: the CUSIDERA and CUTWIDERA.  Hum Reprod. 2004;  19(11) 2442-2444
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Schröder A K, Banz C, Katalinic A et al.. Counselling on cryopreservation of pronucleated oocytes.  Reprod Biomed Online. 2003;  6(1) 69-74
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Tiitinen A, Halttunen M, Härkki P, Vuoristo P, Hyden-Granskog C. Elective single embryo transfer: the value of cryopreservation.  Hum Reprod. 2001;  16(6) 1140-1144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Borini A, Bianchi V, Bonu M A et al.. Evidence-based clinical outcome of oocyte slow cooling.  Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;  15(2) 175-181
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Porcu E, Fabbri R, Damiano G et al.. Clinical experience and applications of oocyte cryopreservation.  Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2000;  169(1-2) 33-37
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Parmegiani L, Cognigni G E, Bernardi S et al.. Freezing within 2 h from oocyte retrieval increases the efficiency of human oocyte cryopreservation when using a slow freezing/rapid thawing protocol with high sucrose concentration.  Hum Reprod. 2008;  , In press
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Borini A, Cattoli M, Mazzone S et al.. Survey of 105 babies born after slow-cooling oocyte cryopreservation.  Fertil Steril. 2007;  88(suppl) S13-S14
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Tur-Kaspa I, Gal M, Horwitz A. Genetics and health of children born from cryopreserved oocytes.  Fertil Steril. 2007;  88 037
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Maher B. Little consensus on egg freezing.  Nature. 2007;  449(7165) 958
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Noyes N, Porcu E, Borini A. Over 900 oocyte cryopreservation babies born with no apparent increase in congenital abnormalities.  Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;  18(6) 769-776
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Andrea BoriniM.D. 

Tecnobios Procreazione

Via Dante 15, 40125 Bologna, Italy

eMail: borini@tecnobiosprocreazione.it