Evaluation of live birth rates and perinatal outcomes following two sequential vitrification/warming events at the zygote and blastocyst stages.

PURPOSE: To study the outcome of sequential cryopreservation-thawing of zygotes followed by the cryopreservation-thawing of blastocysts in the course of an IVF treatment on live birth rate and neonatal parameters. METHODS: Single center, retrospective chart review for the time period of 2015-2020. Clinical and perinatal outcomes were compared between frozen embryo transfer cycles utilizing twice-cryopreserved (n = 182) vs. once-cryopreserved (n = 282) embryos. Univariate and multivariable analyses were used to adjust for relevant confounders. RESULTS: After adjustment for maternal age, gravidity, parity, body mass index (BMI), paternal age, fertilization method used, the number of oocytes retrieved in the fresh cycle, fertilization rate, and transfer medium, the transfer of twice-cryopreserved embryos resulted in a reduced probability of live birth (OR, 0.52; 95% CI 0.27-0.97; p=0.041) compared to once-cryopreserved embryos. No differences in the sex ratio, the mean gestational age, the mean length at birth, or the mean birth weight were found between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The circumstantial use of sequential double vitrification-warming in course of treatment is associated with a reduced (but still reasonable) live birth rate compared to once-cryopreserved embryos. As the neonatal outcomes of twice-cryopreserved embryos are similar to once-cryopreserved embryos, this treatment option appears still valid as a rescue scenario in selected cases.

A randomised, multi-center, open trial comparing a semi-automated closed vitrification system with a manual open system in women undergoing IVF.

STUDY QUESTION: What are outcome and procedural differences when using the semi-automated closed Gavi® device versus the manual open Cryotop® method for vitrification of pronuclear (2PN) stage oocytes within an IVF program? SUMMARY ANSWER: A semi-automated closed vitrification method gives similar clinical results as compared to an exclusively manual, open system but higher procedure duration and less staff convenience. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: A semi-automated closed vitrification device has been introduced to the market, however, little evaluation of its performance in a clinical setting has been conducted so far. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This prospective, randomised, open non-inferiority trial was conducted at three German IVF centers (10/2017-12/2018). Randomization was performed on day of fertilization check, stratified by center and by indication for vitrification (surplus 2PN oocytes in the context of a fresh embryo transfer (ET) cycle or 'freeze-all' of 2PN oocytes). PARTICIPANT/MATERIAL, SETTING, METHODS: The study population included subfertile women, aged 18-40 years, undergoing IVF or ICSI treatment after ovarian stimulation, with 2PN oocytes available for vitrification. The primary outcome was survival rate of 2PN oocytes at first warming procedure in a subsequent cycle and non-inferiority of 2PN survival was to be declared if the lower bound 95% CI of the mean difference in survival rate excluded a difference larger than 9.5%; secondary, descriptive outcomes included embryo development, pregnancy and live birth rate, procedure time and staff convenience. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The randomised patient population consisted of 149 patients, and the per-protocol population (patients with warming of 2PN oocytes for culture and planned ET) was 118 patients. The survival rate was 94.0% (±13.5) and 96.7% (±9.7) in the Gavi® and the Cryotop® group (weighted mean difference -1.6%, 95% CI -4.7 to 1.4, P = 0.28), respectively, indicating non-inferiority of the Gavi® vitrification/warming method for the primary outcome. Embryo development and the proportion of top-quality embryos was similar in the two groups, as were the pregnancy and live birth rate. Mean total procedure duration (vitrification and warming) was higher in the Gavi® group (81 ± 39 min vs 47 ± 15 min, mean difference 34 min, 95% CI 19 to 48). Staff convenience assessed by eight operators in a questionnaire was lower for the Gavi® system. The majority of respondents preferred the Cryotop® method because of practicality issues. LIMITATIONS, REASON FOR CAUTION: The study was performed in centers with long experience of manual vitrification, and the relative performance of the Gavi® system as well as the staff convenience may be higher in settings with less experience in the manual procedure. Financial costs of the two procedures were not measured along the trial. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: With increasing requirements for standardization of procedures and tissue safety, a semi-automated closed vitrification method may constitute a suitable alternative technology to the established manual open vitrification method given the equivalent clinical outcomes demonstrated herein. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The trial received no direct financial funding. The Gavi® instrument, Gavi® consumables and staff training were provided for free by the distributor (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) during the study period. The manufacturer of the Gavi® instrument had no influence on study protocol, study conduct, data analysis, data interpretation or manuscript writing. J.H. has received honoraria and/or non-financial support from Ferring, Merck and Origio. G.G. has received honoraria and/or non-financial support from Abbott, Ferring, Finox, Gedeon Richter, Guerbet, Merck, MSD, ObsEva, PregLem, ReprodWissen GmbH and Theramex. The remaining authors have no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03287479. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 19 September 2017. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 10 October 2017.

What is the net effect of introducing vitrification for cryopreservation of surplus 2PN oocytes in an IVF program?

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to accurately describe outcome differences (cryo-survival, pregnancy rate and live birth rate, both per ET and cumulatively), between the vitrification method and slow-freezing method of surplus 2PN oocytes in an IVF program. METHODS: In 2004, the freezing method for 2PN oocytes was changed from slow-cooling to vitrification. The data of 711 patients (timespan: 1/1999-7/2011; 410 vitrification and 301 slow-cooling events) undergoing a first IVF/ICSI cycles with freezing of 2PN oocytes were retrospectively analyzed. The outcome of one, the first, IVF cycle per patient was explored. The data were analyzed per freezing-thawing attempt as well as cumulatively per one complete IVF cycle, taking pregnancy occurrence after a fresh embryo transfer preceding the cryo-cycle(s) and other confounders (such as female age, elective vs. surplus 2PN cryopreservation) into account by means of exploratory regression analyses. RESULTS: In the vitrification and slow-cooling group, 756 and 376, respectively, attempts of thawing 2PN oocytes were recorded. Each attempt of thawing 2PN oocytes showed statistically significantly higher mean cryo-survival rates after vitrification (effect size approximately 30-40%, with vitrification cryo-survival consistently above 90% in all thawing attempts). Furthermore, the incidence of "zero survival" was lower after vitrification (0.5 vs. 7.3%, p < 0.01). It is estimated that the odds of achieving a live birth per one IVF cycle (fresh and frozen transfers combined) with vitrification of 2PN oocytes is increased approximately 1.4-fold (OR of 1.405, 95% CI 0.968-2.038; p = 0.07); however, statistical significance was not achieved due to sample size. Female age and elective cryopreservation of all 2PN oocytes without a fresh transfer (e.g., hyperresponders) were found to be negatively and positively, respectively, associated with the chance of achieving a live birth. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of vitrification has a measurable impact on the efficacy of an IVF program. However, this effect is not large despite the impressively higher cryo-survival rates with vitrification. The "true" net efficacy effect of introducing 2PN vitrification in an IVF program will, in real life, be lower due to patients not having surplus 2PN oocytes available for freezing and later transfer.

Three years of routine vitrification of human zygotes: is it still fair to advocate slow-rate freezing?

Cryopreservation of human oocytes and embryos is a necessary tool in assisted reproduction treatment that leads to an increased cumulative outcome while decreasing costs. Vitrification is a cryopreservation technique that leads to a glass-like solidification, with rapid cooling of cells or tissues. Nowadays vitrification is claimed to be the future of cryopreservation of human embryos due to improved survival rates and clinical outcomes. This study was conducted at a university clinic to assess the safety and efficiency of vitrification of human zygotes as a routine procedure. A total of 849 pronuclear-stage (PN) zygotes were vitrified between March 2004 and July 2006. During this period, 103 cycles of cryopreserved embryo transfer were completed. In total, 339 PN zygotes were thawed resulting in an 89% survival rate (302 PN zygotes). The mean number of embryos per transfer was 2.2. The pregnancy rate obtained was three times higher (36.9%) than that obtained with the slow-rate freezing method (10.2%) used previously in the same centre. In conclusion, vitrification of human zygotes at the pronuclear stage seems to be a successful and reliable method with favourable outcomes and can be recommended as a routine technique for cryopreservation of human embryos.