» Articles » PMID: 25542819

Long-term Cryopreservation of Human Oocytes Does Not Increase Embryonic Aneuploidy

Overview
Journal Fertil Steril
Date 2014 Dec 28
PMID 25542819
Citations 18
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To determine if long-term cryopreservation of human oocytes affects oocyte developmental competence, blastocyst euploidy, or live-birth rates.

Design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: University-based fertility center.

Patient(s): A total of 33 patients with cryopreserved oocytes underwent oocyte thaw, blastocyst culture, trophectoderm biopsy, and 24-chromosome preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) with array comparative genomic hybridization between December 2011 and July 2014; subjects were compared with 2:1 age-matched controls with fresh oocytes whose embryos underwent trophectoderm biopsy and PGS during the same period.

Intervention(s): None.

Main Outcome Measure(s): Rates of fertilization, blastulation, euploidy, implantation, and live birth.

Result(s): Thirty-three patients (mean age 36.2 ± 3.8 y) thawed 475 oocytes that had been cryopreserved for a median of 3.5 years. Compared with 66 age-matched controls who underwent in vitro fertilization and PGS with fresh oocytes, embryos derived from cryopreserved oocytes demonstrated compromised blastocyst formation (54.5% vs. 66.2%) despite no impairment in fertilization (72.8% vs. 73.2%). Results showed no difference in the number of euploid blastocysts (1.7 ± 1.9 vs. 2 ± 2.5), percentage of euploid blastocysts (44.5% vs. 47.6%), rate of implantation (65% vs. 65%), or rate of live birth and ongoing pregnancy (62.5% vs. 55%) after 24-chromosome PGS with cryopreserved or fresh oocytes.

Conclusion(s): Embryos derived from cryopreserved oocytes demonstrate impaired blastulation but equivalent rates of euploidy, implantation, and live birth compared with blastocysts derived from fresh oocytes, supporting the safety and efficacy of oocyte cryopreservation.

Citing Articles

Surfing follicular waves in ovarian stimulation: is there a role for LH in DuoStim protocols? A narrative review and SWOT analysis.

Vaiarelli A, Cimadomo D, Cerrillo M, Ubaldi F, Garcia Velasco J Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2025; 23(Suppl 1):28.

PMID: 39994627 PMC: 11852546. DOI: 10.1186/s12958-025-01360-9.


Duration of cryostorage is not associated with rates of thaw survival, fertilization, blastulation and ploidy, or pregnancy outcomes of vitrified human oocytes.

Roger S, Estevez S, Hernandez-Nieto C, Kripalani S, Ghofranian A, Baird M J Assist Reprod Genet. 2025; 42(2):525-532.

PMID: 39753943 PMC: 11871184. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-024-03350-z.


Maternal age at transfer following autologous oocyte cryopreservation is not associated with live birth rates.

Barrett F, Cascante S, McCulloh D, Grifo J, Blakemore J J Assist Reprod Genet. 2024; 41(8):1977-1984.

PMID: 38869781 PMC: 11339225. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-024-03149-y.


Oncofertility as an Essential Part of Comprehensive Cancer Treatment in Patients of Reproductive Age, Adolescents and Children.

Lubik-Lejawka D, Gabriel I, Marzec A, Olejek A Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(10).

PMID: 38791937 PMC: 11119835. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16101858.


The live birth rate of vitrified oocyte accumulation for managing diminished ovarian reserve: a retrospective cohort study.

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.