Comparison of oocyte vitrification using a semi-automated or a manual closed system in human siblings: survival and transcriptomic analyses

Background Indications of oocyte vitrification increased substantially over the last decades for clinical and ethical reasons. A semi-automated vitrification system was recently developed making each act of vitrification reproducible. In this study, we evaluated the efficiency of the semi-automated...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of ovarian research Vol. 15; no. 1; pp. 1 - 128
Main Authors Barberet, Julie, Ducreux, Bastien, Bruno, Céline, Guilleman, Magali, Simonot, Raymond, Lieury, Nicolas, Guilloteau, Adrien, Bourc'his, Déborah, Fauque, Patricia
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London BioMed Central Ltd 05.12.2022
BioMed Central
BMC
Subjects
Analysis
Assisted reproductive technology
Automation
Biosynthesis
Cell cycle
Cryopreservation
Donations
Efficiency
Gene expression
Genes
Infertility
Life Sciences
Mechanization
Microinjection
Mitochondrial DNA
Oocyte
Oocytes
Reproductive technologies
RNA
Single-cell RNA-seq
Technology application
Transcriptomics
Vitrification
Sweden
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Background Indications of oocyte vitrification increased substantially over the last decades for clinical and ethical reasons. A semi-automated vitrification system was recently developed making each act of vitrification reproducible. In this study, we evaluated the efficiency of the semi-automated technique of oocyte vitrification by survival rate, morphometric assessment and resistance to empty micro-injection gesture as compared with a manual method. Additionally, we intended to evaluate transcriptomic consequences of both techniques using single-cell RNA-seq technology. Results Post-warming survival rate, oocyte surfaces and resistance to empty micro-injection were comparable between semi-automated and manual vitrification groups. Both oocyte vitrification techniques showed limited differences in the resulting transcriptomic profile of sibling oocytes since only 5 differentially expressed genes were identified. Additionally, there was no difference in median transcript integrity number or percentage of mitochondrial DNA between the two groups. However, a total of 108 genes were differentially expressed between fresh and vitrified oocytes (FDR < 0.05) and showed over-represented of genes related to important cellular process. Conclusions Our results provide reassurance about the influence of semi-automation as compared with the manual vitrification method. Concerning oocyte vitrification itself, no tight common transcriptomic signature associated has been observed across studies. Trial registration NCT03570073. Keywords: Assisted reproductive technology, Cryopreservation, Oocyte, Single-cell RNA-seq, Vitrification
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1757-2215
1757-2215
DOI:10.1186/s13048-022-01064-3