Suppr超能文献

一项针对接受冻融胚胎移植的女性,比较胚胎玻璃化冷冻使用半融氮与液氮的随机对照试验:胚胎学及临床结局

A randomized controlled trial comparing embryo vitrification with slush nitrogen to liquid nitrogen in women undergoing frozen embryo transfer: embryology and clinical outcomes.

作者信息

Klimczak A M, Osman E, Esbert M, Yildirim R M, Whitehead C, Herlihy N S, Hanson B M, Roberts L M, Seli E, Scott R T

机构信息

IVIRMA Global Research Alliance, IVIRMA New Jersey, Basking Ridge, NJ, USA.

IVIRMA Global Research Alliance, IVIRMA Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

出版信息

Hum Reprod. 2025 Mar 1;40(3):426-433. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deaf003.

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION

Does the use of slush nitrogen (SN) for embryo vitrification improve embryo transfer outcomes compared to liquid nitrogen (LN)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

SN is a safe method for embryo preservation and significantly improves post-warming survival rates during repeated vitrification-warming cycles; however, after a single freeze-thaw cycle, pregnancy outcomes are not improved when embryos are vitrified with SN compared to LN.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

SN is a combination of solid and LN, with a temperature lower than regular LN, and it is an alternative to conventional LN in achieving a faster cooling speed. Studies have shown that SN improves survival in non-human embryos and human oocytes. However, it is unknown whether the use of SN reduces blastocyst damage in humans during vitrification-as indicated by increased survival across multiple vitrification-warming cycles-or whether it enhances pregnancy outcomes in a single vitrification-warming cycle.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Following the pre-clinical trial assessing embryo survival after repeated freeze-thaw cycles using SN and LN on 50 donated embryos per group, a randomized controlled trial was performed, where 253 patients were enrolled between September 2020 and January 2022, and 245 underwent an IVF stimulation, which resulted in at least one blastocyst for cryopreservation. Of those, 121 were allocated to the SN (study), and 124 were allocated to the LN (control) group. Randomization occurred on the day of blastocyst biopsy using a computer-generated block schema. Groups were assigned via opaque envelopes, opened by the embryologist on vitrification day. The patient, physician, and clinical team were blinded to the intervention.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: All couples with female aged between 18 and 42 years old undergoing IVF stimulation at one university-affiliated infertility center, with plan for preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy and subsequent single, frozen embryo transfer (FET) were eligible for inclusion in this study.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The pre-clinical trial demonstrated significant improvements in blastocyst survival, with the SN group achieving a mean of 7.5 survived vitrification-warming cycles (range: 3-22), significantly surpassing the mean of 3.0 cycles (range: 0-10) in the LN group (P < 0.0001). Following the pre-clinical trial, 223 patients randomized to SN or LN underwent single FET. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, as were embryology outcomes, including the number of oocytes retrieved, mature oocytes, fertilization rate, and total blastocysts biopsied. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, sustained implantation rate, or miscarriage rate (P = 0.16, 0.80, 0.49, and 0.74, respectively, using Student's t-test). A futility analysis indicated no value in continuing recruitment and therefore the study was closed.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Neonatal or birth outcomes were not assessed. Termination of the study based on futility analysis precludes a conclusion of equivalence between SN and LN.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This study demonstrates that SN is a safe alternative to traditional LN for vitrification; however, it did not demonstrate improvements in the reproductive potential of vitrified embryos.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The project was funded by the Foundation for Embryonic Competence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04496284.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

3 August 2020.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLLMENT: 5 September 2020.

摘要

研究问题

与液氮(LN)相比,使用雪冻氮(SN)进行胚胎玻璃化冷冻是否能改善胚胎移植结局?

总结答案

SN是一种安全的胚胎保存方法,在重复的玻璃化-解冻循环中能显著提高解冻后的存活率;然而,在单次冻融循环后,与LN相比,使用SN玻璃化冷冻胚胎时妊娠结局并未得到改善。

已知信息

SN是固体和LN的混合物,温度低于常规LN,在实现更快的冷却速度方面是传统LN的一种替代方法。研究表明,SN可提高非人类胚胎和人类卵母细胞的存活率。然而,尚不清楚使用SN是否能减少人类玻璃化冷冻过程中的囊胚损伤(如多个玻璃化-解冻循环中存活率增加所示),或者它是否能在单次玻璃化-解冻循环中提高妊娠结局。

研究设计、规模、持续时间:在对每组50个捐赠胚胎使用SN和LN进行重复冻融循环后评估胚胎存活率的临床前试验之后,进行了一项随机对照试验,2020年9月至2022年1月期间招募了253名患者,其中245名接受了体外受精刺激,产生了至少一个用于冷冻保存的囊胚。其中,121名被分配到SN(研究)组,124名被分配到LN(对照)组。在囊胚活检当天使用计算机生成的区组设计进行随机分组。通过不透明信封分组,由胚胎学家在玻璃化冷冻当天打开。患者、医生和临床团队对干预措施不知情。

参与者/材料、设置、方法:所有在一所大学附属不孕不育中心接受体外受精刺激、年龄在18至42岁之间的女性夫妇,计划进行非整倍体植入前基因检测并随后进行单次冷冻胚胎移植(FET),均符合纳入本研究的条件。

主要结果及机遇的作用

临床前试验表明囊胚存活率有显著提高,SN组平均有7.5次存活的玻璃化-解冻循环(范围:3 - 22),显著超过LN组的平均3.0次循环(范围:0 - 10)(P < 0.0001)。临床前试验之后,223名随机分配到SN或LN组的患者接受了单次FET。两组之间的基线特征相似,胚胎学结局也相似,包括回收的卵母细胞数量、成熟卵母细胞、受精率和活检的总囊胚数。两组在妊娠率、临床妊娠率、持续着床率或流产率方面未观察到显著差异(分别使用学生t检验,P = 0.16、0.80、0.49和0.74)。一项无效性分析表明继续招募没有价值,因此该研究结束。

局限性、谨慎理由:未评估新生儿或出生结局。基于无效性分析终止研究排除了得出SN和LN等效的结论。

研究结果的更广泛影响

本研究表明,SN是传统LN用于玻璃化冷冻的一种安全替代方法;然而,它并未证明能提高玻璃化冷冻胚胎的生殖潜力。

研究资金/竞争利益:该项目由胚胎能力基金会资助。

试验注册号

NCT04496284。

试验注册日期

2020年8月3日。

首例患者入组日期

2020年9月5日。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验