Vitrification has detrimental effects on maturation, viability, and subcellular quality of oocytes post IVM in cancerous women: An experimental study.
Fertility preservation
Maturation rate
Meiotic spindle
Vitrification
Zona pellucida birefringence.
IVM
Journal
International journal of reproductive biomedicine
ISSN: 2476-4108
Titre abrégé: Int J Reprod Biomed
Pays: Iran
ID NLM: 101679102
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2019
Mar 2019
Historique:
received:
23
06
2018
revised:
24
10
2018
accepted:
11
11
2018
entrez:
23
8
2019
pubmed:
23
8
2019
medline:
23
8
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In vitro maturation (IVM) of immature oocytes retrieved from ovarian tissue has been considered as a valuable approach for fertility preservation in cancerous patients. To evaluate the efficacy of vitrification on oocyte maturation, survival rates, as well as the subcellular oocyte quality post IVM. The ovarian cortexes from 19 women with cervix and uterine malignancy aged 21-39 yr were collected. Cumulus-oocyte complexes were aspirated from all visible antral follicles. 102 immature oocytes were collected, and 43 oocytes were detected appropriately for IVM (control group). Also, 59 immature oocytes were vitrified, then matured in vitro (IVM) in two groups: with The rate of maturation was significantly higher in controls (55.8%) compared to the other groups. Maturation rate was 23.3% in oocytes cultured in IVM medium enriched with GDF9, and 27.6% in those cultured in IVM medium lacking GDF9 (p = 0.86). Also, the meiotic spindle was present in 74.4% of control oocytes which was significantly higher than the other groups. The proportion of high zona pellucida birefringence was higher in the controls when compared with group 1 (51.2% vs. 23.3%, respectively, p = 0.04). Vitrification had a detrimental effect on oocyte maturation, viability as well as the subcellular quality of the oocytes after IVM in cancerous women.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In vitro maturation (IVM) of immature oocytes retrieved from ovarian tissue has been considered as a valuable approach for fertility preservation in cancerous patients.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy of vitrification on oocyte maturation, survival rates, as well as the subcellular oocyte quality post IVM.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
The ovarian cortexes from 19 women with cervix and uterine malignancy aged 21-39 yr were collected. Cumulus-oocyte complexes were aspirated from all visible antral follicles. 102 immature oocytes were collected, and 43 oocytes were detected appropriately for IVM (control group). Also, 59 immature oocytes were vitrified, then matured in vitro (IVM) in two groups: with
RESULTS
RESULTS
The rate of maturation was significantly higher in controls (55.8%) compared to the other groups. Maturation rate was 23.3% in oocytes cultured in IVM medium enriched with GDF9, and 27.6% in those cultured in IVM medium lacking GDF9 (p = 0.86). Also, the meiotic spindle was present in 74.4% of control oocytes which was significantly higher than the other groups. The proportion of high zona pellucida birefringence was higher in the controls when compared with group 1 (51.2% vs. 23.3%, respectively, p = 0.04).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Vitrification had a detrimental effect on oocyte maturation, viability as well as the subcellular quality of the oocytes after IVM in cancerous women.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31435595
doi: 10.18502/ijrm.v17i3.4516
pmc: PMC6661134
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
There is no conflict of interest regarding our results.
Références
J Ovarian Res. 2013 Apr 18;6:30
pubmed: 23597104
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2011 Apr 23;9:53
pubmed: 21513548
J Hum Reprod Sci. 2017 Apr-Jun;10(2):138-141
pubmed: 28904505
J Reprod Dev. 2006 Oct;52(5):601-6
pubmed: 16807506
Stem Cells Transl Med. 2012 Sep;1(9):668-72
pubmed: 23197873
Fertil Steril. 2006 Jul;86(1):70-80
pubmed: 16818031
Iran J Reprod Med. 2011 Summer;9(3):209-16
pubmed: 26396566
Hum Reprod. 2008 Jan;23(1):67-73
pubmed: 17933754
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018 Aug;227:19-26
pubmed: 29864696
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012 Jun;29(6):507-12
pubmed: 22476503
Reprod Fertil Dev. 2014 Mar;26(3):407-13
pubmed: 23544843
Semin Reprod Med. 2009 Nov;27(6):456-64
pubmed: 19806514
Fertil Steril. 2011 Jun;95(7):2274-8
pubmed: 21496799
Ginekol Pol. 2014 Apr;85(4):264-71
pubmed: 24834703
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2004 Jul 1;115 Suppl 1:S2-7
pubmed: 15196707
Hum Reprod. 2014 Feb;29(2):276-8
pubmed: 24327539
J Clin Oncol. 2013 Jul 1;31(19):2500-10
pubmed: 23715580
Hum Reprod. 2013 Oct;28(10):2728-34
pubmed: 23887075
Obstet Gynecol Int. 2012;2012:695041
pubmed: 23125860
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015 Aug;292(2):459-63
pubmed: 25672909
Reprod Biomed Online. 2017 Jun;34(6):575-582
pubmed: 28365199
Endocrinology. 1999 Mar;140(3):1236-44
pubmed: 10067849
Fertil Steril. 2010 Nov;94(6):2050-3
pubmed: 20079896
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2014 Jan;93(1):32-7
pubmed: 24111534
Fertil Steril. 2017 Jan;107(1):198-204
pubmed: 27810160
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002 Jan;87(1):316-21
pubmed: 11788667
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017 Nov;34(11):1449-1456
pubmed: 28647785
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Feb 19;110(8):E776-85
pubmed: 23382188
Turk J Med Sci. 2016 Feb 27;47(1):368-373
pubmed: 28263517
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013 Aug;288(2):439-44
pubmed: 23467795
Iran J Reprod Med. 2015 Aug;13(8):507-12
pubmed: 26568754
Semin Reprod Med. 2002 Feb;20(1):45-9
pubmed: 11941534
Hum Reprod. 2011 Jul;26(7):1768-74
pubmed: 21558332
Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;19 Suppl 3:29-34
pubmed: 20034421
Swiss Med Wkly. 2012 Oct 01;142:w13645
pubmed: 23037142
Fertil Steril. 2011 Aug;96(2):277-85
pubmed: 21718983
Ital J Anat Embryol. 2012;117(3):190-8
pubmed: 23420948
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016 Jun;33(6):741-6
pubmed: 26984232