Rapid freezing versus Cryotop vitrification of mouse two-cell embryos
© 2018. The Korean Society for Reproductive Medicine. Objective: To compare our in-house method of embryo freezing with Cryotop vitrification in terms of immediate survival, subsequent cleavage and blastocyst formation, and cell numbers in blastocysts. Methods: Two-cell mouse embryos were randomly a...
Saved in:
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Journal |
Published: |
2018
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85053245263&origin=inward http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/62797 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Institution: | Chiang Mai University |
id |
th-cmuir.6653943832-62797 |
---|---|
record_format |
dspace |
spelling |
th-cmuir.6653943832-627972018-11-29T07:50:35Z Rapid freezing versus Cryotop vitrification of mouse two-cell embryos Namfon Inna Usanee Sanmee Ubol Saeng-Anan Waraporn Piromlertamorn Teraporn Vutyavanich Medicine © 2018. The Korean Society for Reproductive Medicine. Objective: To compare our in-house method of embryo freezing with Cryotop vitrification in terms of immediate survival, subsequent cleavage and blastocyst formation, and cell numbers in blastocysts. Methods: Two-cell mouse embryos were randomly allocated into three groups: a non-frozen control group (group 1, n=300), a group that underwent Cryotop vitrification (group 2, n=300), and a group that underwent our in-house freezing method (group 3, n=300). Results: There were no significant differences between groups 2 and 3 in the immediate survival rate (96.3% vs. 98.6%, respectively; p=0.085), the further cleavage rate (91.7% vs. 95.0%, respectively; p=0.099), or the blastocyst formation rate (80.7% vs. 78.6%, respectively; p=0.437). The cell numbers in the blastocysts from groups 1, 2, and 3 were comparable (88.99±10.44, 88.29±14.79, and 86.42±15.23, respectively; p=0.228). However, the percentage of good-quality blastocysts in the Cryotop vitrification group was significantly higher than in the group in which our in-house method was performed, but was lower than in the control group (58.0%, 37.0%, and 82.7%, respectively; p < 0.001). Conclusion: At present, our method is inferior to the commercial Cryotop vitrification system. However, with further improvements, it has the potential to be useful in routine practice, as it is easier to perform than the current vitrification system. 2018-11-29T07:50:35Z 2018-11-29T07:50:35Z 2018-09-01 Journal 22338241 22338233 2-s2.0-85053245263 10.5653/cerm.2018.45.3.110 https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85053245263&origin=inward http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/62797 |
institution |
Chiang Mai University |
building |
Chiang Mai University Library |
country |
Thailand |
collection |
CMU Intellectual Repository |
topic |
Medicine |
spellingShingle |
Medicine Namfon Inna Usanee Sanmee Ubol Saeng-Anan Waraporn Piromlertamorn Teraporn Vutyavanich Rapid freezing versus Cryotop vitrification of mouse two-cell embryos |
description |
© 2018. The Korean Society for Reproductive Medicine. Objective: To compare our in-house method of embryo freezing with Cryotop vitrification in terms of immediate survival, subsequent cleavage and blastocyst formation, and cell numbers in blastocysts. Methods: Two-cell mouse embryos were randomly allocated into three groups: a non-frozen control group (group 1, n=300), a group that underwent Cryotop vitrification (group 2, n=300), and a group that underwent our in-house freezing method (group 3, n=300). Results: There were no significant differences between groups 2 and 3 in the immediate survival rate (96.3% vs. 98.6%, respectively; p=0.085), the further cleavage rate (91.7% vs. 95.0%, respectively; p=0.099), or the blastocyst formation rate (80.7% vs. 78.6%, respectively; p=0.437). The cell numbers in the blastocysts from groups 1, 2, and 3 were comparable (88.99±10.44, 88.29±14.79, and 86.42±15.23, respectively; p=0.228). However, the percentage of good-quality blastocysts in the Cryotop vitrification group was significantly higher than in the group in which our in-house method was performed, but was lower than in the control group (58.0%, 37.0%, and 82.7%, respectively; p < 0.001). Conclusion: At present, our method is inferior to the commercial Cryotop vitrification system. However, with further improvements, it has the potential to be useful in routine practice, as it is easier to perform than the current vitrification system. |
format |
Journal |
author |
Namfon Inna Usanee Sanmee Ubol Saeng-Anan Waraporn Piromlertamorn Teraporn Vutyavanich |
author_facet |
Namfon Inna Usanee Sanmee Ubol Saeng-Anan Waraporn Piromlertamorn Teraporn Vutyavanich |
author_sort |
Namfon Inna |
title |
Rapid freezing versus Cryotop vitrification of mouse two-cell embryos |
title_short |
Rapid freezing versus Cryotop vitrification of mouse two-cell embryos |
title_full |
Rapid freezing versus Cryotop vitrification of mouse two-cell embryos |
title_fullStr |
Rapid freezing versus Cryotop vitrification of mouse two-cell embryos |
title_full_unstemmed |
Rapid freezing versus Cryotop vitrification of mouse two-cell embryos |
title_sort |
rapid freezing versus cryotop vitrification of mouse two-cell embryos |
publishDate |
2018 |
url |
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85053245263&origin=inward http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/62797 |
_version_ |
1681425873953095680 |