Comparison of Spindle and Chromosome Configuration in in Vitro- and in Vivo-matured Mouse Oocytes After Vitrification
Overview
Affiliations
Objective: To compare the cytogenetic changes in in vitro- and in vivo-matured oocytes after vitrification.
Design: In vitro experiments using murine model.
Setting: Animal model study in university laboratory.
Animal(s): CD-1 mice.
Intervention(s): In vitro maturation and vitrification of oocytes.
Main Outcome Measure(s): Post-warming survival, analysis of spindle and chromosome configurations, aneuploidy screening of parthenogenetically activated oocytes, extent of DNA fragmentation, and early embryonic development after IVF.
Result(s): Eighty percent of germinal vesicle-stage oocytes matured after in vitro maturation and were cryopreserved by vitrification (n = 354). There was no significant difference in the post-warming survival of in vitro- and in vivo-matured oocytes (94.1% vs. 91.8%, respectively). The majority of in vitro- and in vivo-matured oocytes maintained normal meiotic spindle morphology and chromosome alignment (88.2% vs. 86.9%, respectively) after vitrification and the incidence of aneuploidy was not increased (11.5% vs. 9.3%). However, in vitro-matured oocytes showed a higher rate of DNA fragmentation after vitrification compared to in vivo-matured oocytes. After vitrification, the cleavage and blastocyst formation rates of in vitro-matured oocytes were significantly lower than those of in vivo-matured oocytes (37.0% vs. 60.0% and 5.4% vs. 18.9%, respectively).
Conclusion(s): Vitrification of in vitro-matured mouse oocytes results in high survival rates, normal meiotic spindle and chromosome alignment, and no increased incidence of aneuploidy. A possible cause of the reduced developmental competence of in vitro-matured and vitrified oocytes may be due to DNA fragmentation.
Daddangadi A, Uppangala S, Kabekkodu S, Khan G N, Kalthur G, Talevi R Reprod Sci. 2024; 31(5):1420-1428.
PMID: 38294668 PMC: 11090971. DOI: 10.1007/s43032-024-01462-6.
Suebthawinkul C, Babayev E, Lee H, Duncan F J Assist Reprod Genet. 2023; 40(5):1197-1213.
PMID: 37012451 PMC: 10239409. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-023-02779-y.
Lee K, Lin M, Hwu Y, Yang J, Lee R J Ovarian Res. 2023; 16(1):49.
PMID: 36869354 PMC: 9983267. DOI: 10.1186/s13048-023-01128-y.
Suebthawinkul C, Babayev E, Zhou L, Lee H, Duncan F Biol Reprod. 2022; 107(4):1097-1112.
PMID: 35810327 PMC: 9562117. DOI: 10.1093/biolre/ioac139.
Chromosome Segregation in the Oocyte: What Goes Wrong during Aging.
Wasielak-Politowska M, Kordowitzki P Int J Mol Sci. 2022; 23(5).
PMID: 35270022 PMC: 8911062. DOI: 10.3390/ijms23052880.