Embryos from vitrified vs. fresh oocytes in an oocyte donation program: a comparative morphokinetic analysis
Mary Karagianni1, Maria Ioanna Papadopoulou1, Chara Oraiopoulou1
1Embryology Department, Embryolab Fertility Clinic, Thessaloniki, Greece.
F&S Science
|April 5, 2024
Summary
Vitrified oocytes show slight differences in early embryo development compared to fresh oocytes, but these do not significantly impact live birth rates in donation cycles. Further research with larger sample sizes is recommended.
Area of Science:
- Reproductive biology
- Embryology
- Assisted reproductive technology
Background:
- Oocyte cryopreservation, particularly vitrification, is a key technique in assisted reproduction.
- Comparing outcomes from vitrified versus fresh oocytes is crucial for optimizing fertility treatments.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the morphokinetic development of human embryos from vitrified oocytes versus fresh oocytes in donation cycles.
- To assess the impact of oocyte vitrification on fertilization, cleavage, blastocyst formation, and clinical outcomes.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective observational study at Embryolab Fertility Clinic.
- Analysis of embryos from 421 vitrified oocytes and 196 fresh oocytes in donation cycles.
- Evaluation of key time parameters, dynamic events, and various reproductive rates using time-lapse technology.
Main Results:
- Vitrified oocytes had a mean survival rate of 92.58%.
- Fertilization rates were significantly lower in the vitrified group (71.92%) compared to the fresh group (80.65%).
- No significant differences were observed in degeneration, cleavage, blastocyst, implantation, or live birth rates between the groups, despite minor variations in early cell cycle progression (CC1 and CC1a).
Conclusions:
- Early embryo development (CC1) shows temporary deviations in vitrified oocytes compared to fresh oocytes.
- These early developmental differences did not significantly affect overall embryo development or clinical outcomes.
- The study suggests that oocyte vitrification is a viable option, though larger sample sizes are needed to confirm the lack of significant impact on clinical results.


