The use of open carriers for embryo vitrification has raised safety concerns and therefore vitrification in closed systems has been proposed. However, the drop in the cooling rate emerges as a major drawback. The objective of the present study was to compare the efficiency of vitrification in open versus closed conditions. Blastocysts were randomly allocated either to open ultra-rapid vitrification (group I) or closed aseptic vitrification (group II). In group I, blastocysts were exposed to two solutions of ethylene glycol/dimethylsulphoxide (10%/10% and 20%/20%), while in group II, blastocysts were pretreated with a solution of lower concentration (5%/5%). A total of 208 and 224 vitrification-warming cycles were performed for groups I and II, respectively. Both groups were equal in terms of maternal age, sperm parameters and number and quality of blastocysts vitrified, warmed and transferred per cycle. Importantly, there was no significant difference between the groups in the analysed outcomes; embryo survival rate (84.1% versus 82.1%), clinical pregnancy rate (45.9% versus 42.4%), implantation rate (25.6% versus 24.5%), cycle cancellation rate (6.7% versus 8.5%) and live birth rate (41.2% versus 41.0%). These data suggest that ultra-rapid vitrification may be replaced by aseptic vitrification without affecting clinical efficiency.
The effect that gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists exert on endometrial receptivity has not yet been elucidated. GnRH antagonists might directly affect oocytes, the embryo and/or the endometrium. The aim of this study was to investigate the direct effect of GnRH antagonists on the endometrium in oocyte donation cycles. In an oocyte donation programme, oocytes from each donor (n = 49), stimulated with gonadotrophins and a GnRH antagonist, were equally shared between two different matched recipients. Recipients were randomly allocated to either receive a GnRH antagonist concomitant to donor during their endometrial priming with oestradiol (group I, n = 49) or to solely continue with their endometrial preparation (group II, n = 49). Pregnancy rate was 55.1% in group I and 59.1% in group II. Implantation rate was 26.1% in group I and 24.4% in group II. Endometrial thickness was also similar between the two groups on the day of human chorionic gonadotrophin injection to the donor. In conclusion, GnRH antagonist administration during the proliferative phase at a dose of 0.25 mg per day does not appear to adversely affect endometrial receptivity in oocyte recipients.
The effect of low-dose human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration in the proliferative phase of oocyte recipients was investigated in a prospective randomized trial. Sibling oocytes from the same donor were shared at random among two different recipients. In group I oocyte recipients received 750 IU of hCG every three days concomitant to endometrial preparation with estradiol until hCG injection to the donor, whereas in group II recipients received no hCG during endometrial priming with estradiol. Endometrial thickness was significantly lower in group I compared with group II, although similar endometrial thickness was detected during the mock cycle. Pregnancy rates were significantly lower in group I than in group II (13.6% vs. 45.4%, p<0.05). Implantation rates were also significantly lower in group I (1.7% vs. 22.4%, p<0.01). The study was discontinued prematurely for ethical reasons when 22 cycles were completed, as pregnancy rates were very low in group I. In conclusion, hCG administration in the proliferative phase might directly affect endometrial proliferation and receptivity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.