Somayeh Keshavarzi, Azadeh Dokht Eftekhari, Hajar Vahabzadeh, Marzieh Mehrafza, Robabeh Taheripanah, Masoumeh Asgharnia, Sahar Esfandyari, Alaleh Ghazifard, Hossein Hosseinirad, Shahrokh Paktinat
JBRA Assist. Reprod. 2022; 26 (4):568-573
Received July 17, 2021
Accepted December 20, 2021
Abstract
Objective: Advances in embryo culture conditions and the development of vitrification as a revolutionary cryopreservation method have allowed for routine use of blastocyst transfer in assisted reproduction technology (ART) cycles. Several vitrification/warming media and devices have been introduced for commercial use so far. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare post-warming survival rates and clinical outcomes of human blastocysts vitrified/warmed by two different commercial methods (CryoTouch and Cryotop) during ART cycles.
Methods: This retrospective study assessed a total of 50 frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles conducted on 56 warmed blastocysts between January 2018 and December 2020. Post-warming blastocyst survival rates and clinical outcomes including clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were calculated after single blastocyst transfer cycles.
Results: The results revealed no significant differences between two groups in post-warming survival rate (p-value=0.8381), clinical pregnancy rate (p-value=0. 8157) and live birth rate (p-value=0.7041).
Conclusions: Post-warming survival rates and clinical outcomes were comparable with no significant difference in blastocysts vitrified/warmed by CryoTouch and Cryotop commercial methods.
