Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 6/2020

01-06-2020 | Assisted Reproduction Technologies

“Universal Warming” protocol for vitrified oocytes to streamline cell exchange for transnational donation programs: a multi-center study

Authors: Lodovico Parmegiani, M. G. Minasi, A. Arnone, V. Casciani, G. E. Cognigni, R. Viñoles, M. T. Varricchio, L. A. Quintero, E. Greco, M. Filicori

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 6/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the clinical efficacy of a “Universal Warming” protocol, based on subsequent steps with 1 M and 0.5 M concentration of extracellular cryoprotectant (ECCP), on shipped oocytes. Oocytes are vitrified using different brands of ready-to-use kits which recommend that the use of their own warming kit and combining different vitrification/warming kits may have legal consequences for assisted reproductive (AR) centers, until this practice has been validated with clinical studies.

Methods

Retrospective multi-center transnational observational study. Number of oocytes warmed 1.898. Vitrification performed with vitrification kit (Kitazato, Japan); warming carried out randomly with two different kits: Kitazato warming kit and Vit Kit®-Thaw (FujiFilm Irvine, USA). Warmed oocytes were assigned to 2 groups: KK (Kitazato/Kitazato) 939, and KI (Kitazato/Irvine) 959. Primary endpoint: survival rate. Secondary endpoints: fertilization rate; blastulation rate; implantation rate; live birth rate.

Results

Survival was comparable between the groups: 84.6% (795/939) in group KK vs 82.1% (787/959) in group KI. Fertilization rate was lower (P = 0.027) in group KK (75.7%—602/795) than in group KI (80.4%—633/787). Blastulation and implantation and live birth rates were all statistically comparable between the study groups: blastulation rate was 58.5% (352/602) vs 57.8% (366/633); implantation rate was 41.5% (80/193) vs 45.9% (84/183); live birth rate was 52.5% (62/118) in KK and 45.0% (54/120) in KI.

Conclusion

The use of this “Universal Warming” protocol simplifies vitrified oocyte exchange between AR centers in different countries, and overcomes potential regulatory/commercial/availability differences affecting clinical practice.
Literature
1.
Parmegiani L, Tatone C, Cognigni GE, Bernardi S, Troilo E, Arnone A, et al. Rapid warming increases survival of slow-frozen sibling oocytes: a step towards a single warming procedure irrespective of the freezing protocol? Reprod BioMed Online. 2014;28:614–23.CrossRef
2.
Parmegiani L, Cognigni GE, Bernardi S, Cuomo S, Ciampaglia W, Infante FE, et al. Efficiency of aseptic open vitrification and hermetical cryostorage of human oocytes. Reprod BioMed Online. 2011;23:505–12.CrossRef
3.
Shi Q, Xie Y, Wang Y, Li S. Vitrification versus slow freezing for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2017;7:8538.CrossRef
4.
Edgar DH, Gook DA. A critical appraisal of cryopreservation (slow cooling versus vitrification) of human oocytes and embryos. Hum Reprod Update. 2012;18:536–4.CrossRef
5.
Parmegiani L, Bernardi S, Garello C, Granella F, Criscuoli L, Dabizzi S, et al. Testing the efficiency of the “universal warming protocol”. Multicenter randomised controlled study on human slow frozen oocytes. Reprod BioMed Online. 2014;28:Suppl 5.CrossRef
6.
Parmegiani L, Garello C, Revelli A, Criscuoli L, Dabizzi S, Gualtieri R, et al. Efficacy and efficiency of the “universal warming protocol”: multicenter randomized controlled study on human slow frozen oocytes. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:e122.CrossRef
7.
Parmegiani L, Beilby KH, Arnone A, Bernardi S, Maccarini AM, Nardi E, et al. Testing the efficacy and efficiency of a single "universal warming protocol" for vitrified human embryos: prospective randomized controlled trial and retrospective longitudinal cohort study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018;35:1887–95.CrossRef
8.
Parmegiani L, Arnone A, Cognigni G, Quintero L, Vinoles R, Filicori M. Universal warming protocol” for a transnational egg donation program with vitrified oocytes. Fertil Steril. 2018;110:e230.
9.
Parmegiani L, Maccarini AM, Rastellini A, Bernardi S, Troilo E, Arnone A, et al. Oocyte vitrification/storage/handling/transportation/ warming, effect on survival and clinical results in donation programmes. Current Trends in Clinical Embryology. 2017;4:34–40.CrossRef
10.
Nunez R, Parmegiani L, Olaya Vila E, Cortés Gallego S, Caballero PP. Oocyte donation in Italy: effect on Spanish scenario. Current Trends in Clinical Embryology. 2017;4:41–4.CrossRef
11.
Filicori M, Cognigni GE. Clinical review 126: roles and novel regimens of luteinizing hormone and follicle-stimulating hormone in ovulation induction. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2001;86:1437–41.PubMed
12.
Parmegiani L, Cognigni GE, Bernardi S, Ciampaglia W, Infante F, Pocognoli P, et al. Freezing within 2 h from oocyte retrieval increases the efficiency of human oocyte cryopreservation when using a slow freezing/rapid thawing protocol with high sucrose concentration. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:1771–7.CrossRef
13.
Kuwayama M, Vajta G, Kato O, Leibo SP. Highly efficient vitrification method for cryopreservation of human oocytes. Reprod BioMed Online. 2005;11:300–8.CrossRef
14.
Cobo A, Meseguer M, Remohí J, Pellicer A. Use of cryo-banked oocytes in an ovum donation programme: a prospective, randomized, controlled, clinical trial. Hum Reprod. 2010;25:2239–46.CrossRef
15.
Alikani M, Parmegiani L. Human reproductive cell cryopreservation, storage, handling, and transport: risks and risk management. Semin Reprod Med. 2018;36:265–72.CrossRef
16.
Mori C, Yabuuchi A, Ezoe K, Murata N, Takayama Y, Okimura T, et al. Hydroxypropyl cellulose as an option for supplementation of cryoprotectant solutions for embryo vitrification in human assisted reproductive technologies. Reprod BioMed Online. 2015;30:613–21.CrossRef
17.
Parmegiani L, Accorsi A, Cognigni GE, Bernardi S, Troilo E, Filicori M. Sterilization of liquid nitrogen with ultraviolet irradiation for safe vitrification of human oocytes or embryos. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1525–8.CrossRef
18.
Parmegiani L, Accorsi A, Bernardi S, Arnone A, Cognigni GE, Filicori M. A reliable procedure for decontamination before thawing of human specimens cryostored in liquid nitrogen: three washes with sterile liquid nitrogen (SLN2). Fertil Steril. 2012;98:870–5.CrossRef
19.
Mackens S, Santos-Ribeiro S, van de Vijver A, Racca A, Van Landuyt L, Tournaye H, et al. Frozen embryo transfer: a review on the optimal endometrial preparation and timing. Hum Reprod. 2017;32:2234–42.CrossRef
20.
Alpha Scientists In Reproductive Medicine. The Alpha consensus meeting on cryopreservation key performance indicators and benchmarks: proceedings of an expert meeting. Reprod BioMed Online. 2012;25:146–67.CrossRef
21.
ESHRE Special Interest Group of Embryology and Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine. The Vienna consensus: report of an expert meeting on the development of ART laboratory performance indicators. Reprod BioMed Online. 2017;35:494–510.CrossRef
22.
Cobo A, Garrido N, Pellicer A, Remohí J. Six years' experience in ovum donation using vitrified oocytes: report of cumulative outcomes, impact of storage time, and development of a predictive model for oocyte survival rate. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:1426–34.CrossRef
23.
McDonald CA, Valluzo L, Chuang L, et al. Nitrogen vapor shipment of vitrified oocytes: time for caution. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:2628–30.CrossRef
24.
Shun X, Liu JX, Huang GN. Rapid warming method can improve the survival rate of slow freezing with cryovial carriers. Hum Reprod 2017;32 Suppl 1: i195. Fertil Steril. 2009;4:1611–3.
25.
Hengherr S, Heyer AG, Kohler HR, Schill RO. Trehalose and anhydrobiosis in tardigrades—evidence for divergence in responses to dehydration. FEBS J. 2008;275:281–8.CrossRef
26.
McWilliams RB, Gibbons WE, Leibo SP. Osmotic and physiological responses of mouse zygotes and human oocytes to mono- and disaccharides. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:1163–71.CrossRef
27.
Coello A, Campos P, Remohí J, Meseguer M, Cobo A. Combination of hydroxypropyl cellulose and trehalose as supplementation for vitrification of human oocytes: a retrospective cohort study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016;33:413–21.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
“Universal Warming” protocol for vitrified oocytes to streamline cell exchange for transnational donation programs: a multi-center study
Authors
Lodovico Parmegiani
M. G. Minasi
A. Arnone
V. Casciani
G. E. Cognigni
R. Viñoles
M. T. Varricchio
L. A. Quintero
E. Greco
M. Filicori
Publication date
01-06-2020
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 6/2020
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-020-01798-3

Other articles of this Issue 6/2020

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 6/2020 Go to the issue

Genetics

Clinical and genetic analysis of an isolated follicle-stimulating hormone deficiency female patient

Genetics

Interaction of thrombophilic SNPs in patients with unexplained infertility—multifactor dimensionality reduction (MDR) model analysis

Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Blastocyst mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is not affected by oocyte vitrification: a sibling oocyte study

Commentary

Ovarian tissue cryopreservation as standard of care: what does this mean for pediatric populations?

Commentary

When “facts” are not facts: what does p value really mean, and how does it deceive us?

Opinion

Social media in ART—#power or #peril?