Vitrificacion de blastocitos bovinos producidos in vitro con el método Open Pulled Straw (OPS): Primer reporte*

Silva, M. E.; Berland, M.

doi:10.4067/s0301-732x2004000100009

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the subsequent application of this technique to spermatozoa of different kind of animals and humans failed to give promising results: the survival was very low or lacking (Hoagland & Pincus, 1942). Since the first report about successfully applying the vitrification technique to mouse embryos (Rall & Fahy, 1985), this method has been investigated extensively and successfully applied to female gametes and embryos of different mammalian species including humans (Chen et al, 2001;Cervera & Garcia-Ximénez, 2003;Isachenko et al, 2004a;Silva & Berland, 2004). However, it cannot be directly extrapolated to male gametes, due to deleterious osmotic effect of high concentrated permeable cryoprotectants.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Canine sperm vitrification with sucrose: effect on sperm function

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability of sucrose to protect spermatozoa against mitochondrial damage, artificial acrosome reaction and DNA fragmentation during ultra-rapid cryopreservation in canine sperm was investigated. Swim-up selected spermatozoa of second-fraction semen were vitrified with different concentrations of sucrose (0.1, 0.25 and 0.4 m) in proportion 1 : 1 v/v with HTF-BSA 1%. From each group, 30-μl suspensions of cells were dropped directly into liquid nitrogen and stored for at least 24 h. Cells were thawed by submerging the spheres in HTF with 1% BSA at 37 °C. The number of progressively motile spermatozoa was significantly higher in the sucrose 0.25 m + HTF-BSA 1% (42.5 ± 2.3%, P < 0.01) than in HTF only (1.66 ± 0.3%). The same combination of sucrose 0.25 m + HTF-BSA 1% (42.7 ± 1.5%) had a stronger cryoprotective effect on the integrity of mitochondrial membrane potential (P < 0.05) and decreased the DNA fragmentation (2.8 ± 0.5%) as compared with HTF only (1.93 ± 0.6% and 5.6 ± 0.6% respectively). With respect to acrosome-reacted spermatozoa, no significant difference was found between the groups investigated (P > 0.05). It is concluded that sucrose, a nonpermeable cryoprotectant, can effectively preserve important physiological parameters such as mitochondrial membrane potential and DNA integrity during ultra-rapid cryopreservation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Canine sperm vitrification with sucrose: effect on sperm function

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The promising results after successful vitrification of frog (Luyet and Hoddap, 1938) and fowl (Schaffner, 1942) spermatozoa were not confirmed in subsequent investigations (Hoagland and Pincus, 1942;Smith, 1962) and work in this direction was stopped for 40 years. At present, as an extremely rapid method of cryopreservation (Silva and Berland, 2004), called vitrification, have been investigated extensively and applied to embryos (Cervera and Garcia-Ximénez, 2003) and oocytes (Isachenko et al, 2004a;Chen et al, 2001), but very seldom to spermatozoa, with the exception of a few reports (Isachenko et al,2003a;2004a;2004b;Nawroth et al, 2002;Koshimoto C, Mazur, 2002;Schuster et al, 2003;Desai et al, 2004;Hossain AM, Osuamkpe, 2007).…”

Section: Vitrification Without Cryoprotectantmentioning

confidence: 99%

Novel Approaches to the Cryopreservation of Human Spermatozoa: History and Development of the Spermatozoa Vitrification Technology

Isachenko

Rahimi

Mallmann

et al. 2011

Journal of Reproductive and Stem Cell Biotechnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cryobiology is very intensively applied in reproductive and veterinary medicine for preservation of gametes, embryos and reproductive tissues. Sub-zero temperatures combined with appropriate cryoprotective agents preserve the physiological and reproductive functions of the cells making long-term storage possible without loss of viability. With the use of cryoprotective agents it has become possible to develop cryopreservation techniques, such as the slow conventional freezing and vitrification that are in use in the present times. In slow controlled-rate conventional freezing extracellular ice crystals are formed whereas in vitrification no ice crystals are formed. Glass formation is compatible with the survival of the cell and the preservation of its intracellular structures provided the type(s) and concentrations of cryoprotectant used are not chemo- or osmotoxic. However, irrespective of the type of cooling method employed the cryosurvival of cells and tissues is influenced by the size and maturity of cells, amounts of intracellular water, quality and quantity of intracellular lipids, type of cells, their function and morphology. The intracellular milieu of cryopreserved cells and tissues remain less understood. The application of nanotechnology may help reveal and help advance our knowledge of the cryobiological principles involved in cryosurvival. At this moment the methods of cryopreservation that merit further investigation are vitrification and lyophilization. Vitrification is cheap if reagents are prepared in-house and the procedure can be performed rapidly. It has been successfully applied for gametes and embryos (of different stages of development), and reproductive cells/tissues, somatic cells and stem cells. However, vitrification is more demanding technically and requires operation and storage at sub-zero temperatures. On the other hand lyophilization deserves further investigation because it is a cheaper form of cryopreservation that may enable cryostorage at less demanding temperatures of 4°C and may even allow transport at ambient temperature. These possibilities are explored in this review.

show abstract

“…In contrast to the programmable ("slow") conventional freezing, vitrification has series of technological advantages useful for the practice: it renders the use of permeable cryoprotectants superfluous and, in addition, is much faster, simpler in application and more cost-effective than conventional freezing. In spite of that this method has been investigated extensively and successfully applied to female gametes and embryos of different mammalian species including humans (Rall & Fahy, 1985;Chen et al, 2001;Reed et al, 2002;Cervera & GarciaXiménez, 2003;Isachenko et al, 2005bIsachenko et al, , 2007Silva & Berland, 2004), however, it cannot be directly extrapolated to male gametes, due to deleterious osmotic effect of high concentrations of permeable cryoprotectants.…”

Section: What Is the Reason?mentioning

confidence: 99%