HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 67/6/1671    most recent biolreprod.102.006833v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Liebermann, J. Articles by Tucker, M. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Liebermann, J. Articles by Tucker, M. J. Agricola Articles by Liebermann, J. Articles by Tucker, M. J.

Potential Importance of Vitrification in Reproductive Medicine

^a Shady Grove Fertility Reproductive Science Center, Rockville, Maryland 20850 ^b Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cologne, 50931 Cologne, Germany ^c Georgia Reproductive Specialists, Atlanta, Georgia 30342

As early as 1985, ice-free cryopreservation of mouse embryos at -196°C by vitrification was reported in an attempted alternative approach to cryostorage. Since then, vitrification techniques have entered more and more the mainstream of animal reproduction as an alternative cryopreservation method to traditional slow-cooling/rapid-thaw protocols. In addition, the last few years have seen a significant resurgence of interest in the potential benefits of vitrification protocols and techniques in human-assisted reproductive technologies. The radical strategy of vitrification results in the total elimination of ice crystal formation, both within the cells being vitrified (intracellular) and in the surrounding solution (extracellular). The protocols for vitrification are very simple. They allow cells and tissue to be placed directly into the cryoprotectant and then plunged directly into liquid nitrogen. To date, however, vitrification as a cryopreservation method has had very little practical impact on human-assisted reproduction, and human preimplantation embryo vitrification is still considered to be largely experimental. Besides the inconsistent survival rates that have been reported, another problem is the wide variety of different carriers and vessels that have been used for vitrification. Second, many different vitrification solutions have been formulated, which has not helped to focus efforts on perfecting a single approach. On the other hand, the reports of successfully completed pregnancies following vitrification at all preimplantation stages is encouraging for further research and clinical implementation. Clearly, however, attention needs to be paid to the inconsistent survival rates following vitrification.

¹ Correspondence: Michael J. Tucker, Georgia Reproductive Specialists, 5445 Meridian Mark Road, Suite 270, Atlanta, GA 30342. FAX: 301 340 1612; mtucker{at}ivf.com