| Title |
Vitrification of human ovarian tissue: a practical and relevant alternative to slow freezing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12958-015-0065-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sandra Sanfilippo, Michel Canis, Johan Smitz, Benoît Sion, Claude Darcha, Laurent Janny, Florence Brugnon |
| Abstract |
Cryopreservation of ovarian tissue can be used to preserve the fertility of patients who are about to receive treatment(s) that could compromise their future ovarian function. Here we evaluate the effectiveness of a vitrification protocol by carrying out a systematic comparison with a conventional slow-freezing method on human ovarian tissue. Human ovarian samples (mean age 28.0 ± 1.1 years) were processed in parallel for each cryopreservation procedure: vitrification and slow-freezing. Following warming/thawing, histological observations and a TUNEL assay in ovarian follicles were performed and compared to unfrozen control. Both cryopreservation protocols gave comparable histological outcomes. Percentage of intact follicles was 83.6 % following vitrification in a 1.5 M 1,2-propanediol (PrOH), 1.5 M ethylene glycol (EG) and 0.5 M raffinose solution, 80.7 % after slow-freezing in 1.5 M PrOH and 0.025 M raffinose, and 99.6 % in fresh tissue. Follicle density was unchanged by vitrification (0.6 follicles/mm2) or slow-freezing (0.5 follicles/mm2) compared to fresh tissue (0.7 follicles/mm2). Percentage of follicles with DNA fragmentation was not statistically different in vitrified (20.8 %) or slow-frozen (31.3 %) tissues compared to the unfrozen control (35.0 %). There was no difference in proportion of stroma cells with DNA fragmentation in vitrified (6.4 %) and slow-frozen (3.7 %) tissues compared to unfrozen tissue (4.2 %). This vitrification protocol enables good preservation of ovarian quality post-warming. The evaluation of endocrine function after vitrification need to be perform in a higher cohort to evaluate if this protocol may offer a relevant alternative to conventional slow-freezing for the cryopreservation of human ovarian tissue. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 81 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 15% |
| Unknown | 23 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 24% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 22% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 15% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 25 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 July 2015.
All research outputs
#15,339,713
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
#536
of 973 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,152
of 263,898 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
#14
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 973 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,898 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.