Closed vs. Open Oocyte Vitrification Methods Are Equally Effective for Blastocyst Embryo Transfers: Prospective Study from a Sibling Oocyte Donation Program.


Journal

Gynecologic and obstetric investigation
ISSN: 1423-002X
Titre abrégé: Gynecol Obstet Invest
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 7900587

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2020
Historique:
received: 02 08 2019
accepted: 26 02 2020
pubmed: 18 3 2020
medline: 9 9 2020
entrez: 18 3 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To assess whether open and closed vitrification protocols are equally effective for sibling-oocyte cycles when performing blastocyst embryo transfers. A prospective study was set up comparing the open and the closed vitrification techniques in oocyte recipients sharing sibling oocytes between 2014 and 2016. Sibling oocytes were randomly and equally assigned into the closed group (oocytes vitrified in a closed system) or the open group (oocytes vitrified in an open system). Intracytoplasmic sperm injection was performed on all cases. Embryo transfers were performed on day 5. Power analysis calculation showed that 94 cycles would be needed for each group in the study in order to achieve statistical significance at a 5% level with power 80%. The final number of donors included was 95. A total of 190 recipients matched with their donors were included in the study. There was no difference in the mean number of oocytes vitrified with the closed or the open system (8.26 ± 2.54 vs. 8.31 ± 2.57). No significant difference was observed between the 2 groups regarding survival rate, fertilization rate, cleavage rate, top-quality embryos on day 3, blastocyst rate, and top-quality blastocyst rate. Moreover, no statistically significant difference in the b-human chorionic gonadotropin-positive rate, clinical pregnancy rate per cycle, implantation rate, ongoing pregnancy rate, and live birth rate between closed and open groups. Οpen and closed vitrification protocols are equally effective for sibling-oocyte cycles.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32182615
pii: 000506803
doi: 10.1159/000506803
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Randomized Controlled Trial

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

206-212

Informations de copyright

© 2020 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Auteurs

Giuseppe Gullo (G)

Department of Human Pathology, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.

Stamatios Petousis (S)

IAKENTRO, Infertility Treatment Center, Thessaloniki, Greece, petousisstamatios@gmail.com.

Achilleas Papatheodorou (A)

IAKENTRO, Infertility Treatment Center, Thessaloniki, Greece.

Yannis Panagiotidis (Y)

IAKENTRO, Infertility Treatment Center, Thessaloniki, Greece.

Chrysoula Margioula-Siarkou (C)

IAKENTRO, Infertility Treatment Center, Thessaloniki, Greece.

Nikolaos Prapas (N)

IAKENTRO, Infertility Treatment Center, Thessaloniki, Greece.

Rosario D'Anna (R)

Department of Human Pathology, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.

Antonio Perino (A)

Department of Sciences for Health Promotion and Mother-Child Care "G. D'Alessandro," Polyclinic University Hospital, Palermo, Italy.

Gaspare Cucinella (G)

Department of Sciences for Health Promotion and Mother-Child Care "G. D'Alessandro," Polyclinic University Hospital, Palermo, Italy.

Yannis Prapas (Y)

IAKENTRO, Infertility Treatment Center, Thessaloniki, Greece.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH