Vitrification versus slow freezing for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation: a systematic review and meta-anlaysis
Abstract Vitrification is a well-accepted procedure for cryopreservation of gametes and embryos. Less is known, however, about its performance in preserving ovarian tissue, for which slow freezing is the current convention. Increasing interest is being focused on vitrification, but there are as yet...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Portfolio
2017-08-01
|
| Series: | Scientific Reports |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-09005-7 |
| _version_ | 1818851103863734272 |
|---|---|
| author | Qingquan Shi Yidong Xie Yan Wang Shangwei Li |
| author_facet | Qingquan Shi Yidong Xie Yan Wang Shangwei Li |
| author_sort | Qingquan Shi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Vitrification is a well-accepted procedure for cryopreservation of gametes and embryos. Less is known, however, about its performance in preserving ovarian tissue, for which slow freezing is the current convention. Increasing interest is being focused on vitrification, but there are as yet no standard protocols for its use with ovarian tissue. In part, this is because of the variety of cell types and complex nature of ovarian tissue. We performed a meta-analysis of 14 studies that compared vitrification with slow freezing for cryopreservation of ovarian tissue. In the pooled analysis, there was no significant difference between the two methods in terms of the proportion of intact primordial follicles, but vitrification was associated with significantly less DNA damage. Secondary endpoints included the number of stromal cells, significantly higher with vitrification, and primordial follicle density, which did not differ between the two methods. The present meta-analysis suggests that vitrification may be more effective than slow freezing, with less primordial follicular DNA strand breaks and better preservation of stromal cells. These advantages should lead to improved ovarian function after transplantation. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-19T06:59:43Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-0e10ba33464547e592cb1295710bc6d6 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2045-2322 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-19T06:59:43Z |
| publishDate | 2017-08-01 |
| publisher | Nature Portfolio |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Scientific Reports |
| spelling | doaj.art-0e10ba33464547e592cb1295710bc6d62022-12-21T20:31:26ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222017-08-01711910.1038/s41598-017-09005-7Vitrification versus slow freezing for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation: a systematic review and meta-anlaysisQingquan Shi0Yidong Xie1Yan Wang2Shangwei Li3Department of Reproductive Medical Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan UniversityDepartment of Reproductive Medical Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan UniversityDepartment of Reproductive Medical Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan UniversityDepartment of Reproductive Medical Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan UniversityAbstract Vitrification is a well-accepted procedure for cryopreservation of gametes and embryos. Less is known, however, about its performance in preserving ovarian tissue, for which slow freezing is the current convention. Increasing interest is being focused on vitrification, but there are as yet no standard protocols for its use with ovarian tissue. In part, this is because of the variety of cell types and complex nature of ovarian tissue. We performed a meta-analysis of 14 studies that compared vitrification with slow freezing for cryopreservation of ovarian tissue. In the pooled analysis, there was no significant difference between the two methods in terms of the proportion of intact primordial follicles, but vitrification was associated with significantly less DNA damage. Secondary endpoints included the number of stromal cells, significantly higher with vitrification, and primordial follicle density, which did not differ between the two methods. The present meta-analysis suggests that vitrification may be more effective than slow freezing, with less primordial follicular DNA strand breaks and better preservation of stromal cells. These advantages should lead to improved ovarian function after transplantation.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-09005-7 |
| spellingShingle | Qingquan Shi Yidong Xie Yan Wang Shangwei Li Vitrification versus slow freezing for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation: a systematic review and meta-anlaysis Scientific Reports |
| title | Vitrification versus slow freezing for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation: a systematic review and meta-anlaysis |
| title_full | Vitrification versus slow freezing for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation: a systematic review and meta-anlaysis |
| title_fullStr | Vitrification versus slow freezing for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation: a systematic review and meta-anlaysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Vitrification versus slow freezing for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation: a systematic review and meta-anlaysis |
| title_short | Vitrification versus slow freezing for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation: a systematic review and meta-anlaysis |
| title_sort | vitrification versus slow freezing for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation a systematic review and meta anlaysis |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-09005-7 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT qingquanshi vitrificationversusslowfreezingforhumanovariantissuecryopreservationasystematicreviewandmetaanlaysis AT yidongxie vitrificationversusslowfreezingforhumanovariantissuecryopreservationasystematicreviewandmetaanlaysis AT yanwang vitrificationversusslowfreezingforhumanovariantissuecryopreservationasystematicreviewandmetaanlaysis AT shangweili vitrificationversusslowfreezingforhumanovariantissuecryopreservationasystematicreviewandmetaanlaysis |