Objective
There are controversies regarding in vitro maturation (IVM) procedure, the time of storing frozen oocytes and maturation stage of vitrified oocytes and its impact on oocytes fertilization capability. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the impact of vitrification on human oocytes during IVM procedure.
Study Design
A systematic review with meta-analysis was undertaken. Main search terms were those related key words. We searched Medline, Embase, Scopus and ISI web of science to detect English-language studies. The final search was performed on 27 January 2018. The original articles which studied laboratory outcomes after vitrification of MII or GV oocytes before or after IVM were included. Exclusion criteria were animal trials and the studies that performed cryopreservation using slow-freeze method. Oocyte maturation, survival, fertilization and cleavage rates were assessed. Bias and quality assessments were applied.
Results
2476 articles were screened and after duplicates removing together with application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, 14 studies assessed for eligibility. Finally 5 studies included for analysis. All studies compared laboratory outcomes between oocytes that vitrified at the GV stage and those which firstly matured in vitro, and then vitrified. Meta-analysis showed that vitrification of oocytes at GV stage had a negative impact on maturation rate (RR = 1.28, 95% CI: 0.96−1.70); but not on cleavage rate (RR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.70−1.64); fertilization rate (RR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.85−1.14) and survival rate (RR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.96−1.06).
Conclusion
In general, Based on our results, oocyte vitrification decreases the maturation rate. In addition, survival, fertilization as well as cleavage rates did not significantly differ between the oocytes vitrified before IVM versus oocytes vitrified after IVM.
Mehdi Mohsenzadeh, Amin Salehi-Abargouei, Nasim Tabibnejhad, Mojgan Karimi-Zarchi, Mohammad Ali Khalili
EJOG, August 2018, Volume 227, Pages 19−26
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.05.029
