Cite this article
12
Downloads
1
Citations
32
Views
Announcements
Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology (CEOG) is published by IMR Press from Volume 47 Issue 1 (2020). Previous articles were published by another publisher on a subscription basis, and they are hosted by IMR Press on imrpress.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with S.O.G.
Original Research
A prospective comparison of outcome following cryopreservation using vitrification vs. a modified slow-freeze protocol of 2 pronuclear (2PN) and day 3 multi-cell embryos
Show Less
1
Cooper Institute for Reproductive Hormonal Disorders, P.C., Mt. Laurel, NJ
1
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Reproductive Endocrinology & Infertility, Camden, NJ (USA)
2
Cooper Medical School of Rowan University
Clin. Exp. Obstet. Gynecol. 2016, 43(3), 330–331;
https://doi.org/10.12891/ceog3230.2016
Published: 10 June 2016
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the efficacy of vitrification of 2 pronuclear and day 3 cleavage stage embryo vs. a modified slow freeze protocol that historically has achieved good survival and pregnancy rates at these stages. Materials and Methods: Embryos were randomly assigned by day to freezing at the 2 proncular stage or day 3 cleavage stage embryos by either vitrification or a modified slow freeze protocol. Comparisons were made for survival rate, cleaveage rate, and pregnancy rate. Results: The results were comparable with a slight edge to vitrification. Only the implantation rates of day 3 cleavage staged embryos (75% vs. 30.4%) showed a significant difference. Conclusions: Vitrification seems to be equally or possibly slightly superior to freezing embryos at the 2 pronuclear or day 3 cleavage stage vs. a modified slow freeze protocol that had been previously found to be superior to the slow freeze method of LaSalle-Testart.
Keywords
Vitrification
Modified slow freeze
2 pronuclear embryos
Day 3 cleavage stage embryos
Frozen embryo transfer