A Comparison of the Effect of Vitrification on the Morphology of Stimulated and Non-stimulated Human Ovaries

Authors
M. Ramezani 1
M. Salehnia 1
M. Jafarabadi 2
1 Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
2 Infertility and Reproductive Health Research Center (IRHRC), Imam Khomeini Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of vitrification on the morphology of human ovarian tissue in a stimulated group compared to a non-stimulated group.
Methods: Ovarian cortex biopsies collected from stimulated and non-stimulated groups were transported to the laboratory in L-15 medium. Biopsies were cut into small pieces and divided randomly into the vitrified and non-vitrified subgroups. The vitrified-warmed and fresh samples were fixed using Bouin’s solution, then passaged, sectioned and stained with hematoxylin and eosin and Masson’s trichrome. The follicles at different developmental stages were counted and evaluated.
Results: Morphological observations showed that the follicles and stromal tissue had well preserved normal structures after vitrification and warming. The percentage of normal follicles in the non-stimulated non-vitrified group was 89.22%; for the non-stimulated vitrified group, it was 84.60%. In previous groups the proportion of primordial follicles were 68.7 ± 1.60% and 67.80 ± 3.71%, primary follicles were 28.60 ± 1.72% and 29.40 ± 3.51%, and secondary follicles were 3.60 ± 0.66% and 2.70 ± 1.20%, respectively. The percentage of normal follicles in the stimulated non-vitrified group was 88.18%; for the stimulated vitrified group, it was 84.19%. In stimulated non-vitrified and stimulated vitrified groups the proportion of primordial follicles were 49.70 ± 4.13% and 49.34 ± 2.86%, primary follicles were 44.50 ± 3.83% and 44.72 ± 2.68%, and secondary follicles were 5.60 ± 0.72% and 5.91 ± 0.77%, respectively. There was no significant difference between the vitrified and non-vitrified and stimulated and non-stimulated groups.
Conclusion: Vitrification had no harmful effect on the morphology of stimulated human ovarian tissue and stroma and ovarain tissue structure was similar to the non-stimulated group. This method could be a good alternative for fertility preservation.

Keywords

[1]     Salehnia M. Cryopreservation of Ovarian Tissue. Medical J of Yazd Univ 2003; 11(4): 3-17. (Persian)
[2]     Salehnia M, Moazzeni SM. Histological study of the effect of vitrification using ethylene glycol as cryoprotectant on the mouse ovarian tissue. Midde East Fertil Soc J 2001; 6(3): 233-8.
[3]     Jafarabadi M, Abdollahi M, Salehnia M. Assessment of vitrification outcome by xenotransplantation of ovarian cortex pieces in γ-irradiated mice: morphological and molecular analyses of apoptosis. J Assist Reprod Genet 2015; 32(2): 195-205. (Persion)
[4]     Isachenko V, Isachenko E, Kreienberg R, Woriedh M, Weiss J. Human ovarian tissue cryopreservation: quality of follicles as a criteria of effectiveness. Reprod Biomed Online 2010; 20(4): 441-2.
[5]     Tian T, Zhao G, Han D, Zhu K, Chen D, Zhang Z, Wei Z, Cao Y, Zhou P. Effects of vitrification cryopreservation on follicular morphology and stress relaxation behaviors of human ovarian tissues: sucrose versus trehalose as the non-permeable protective agent. Hum Reprod 2015; 30(4): 877-83.
[6]     Kikuchi I, Kagawa N, Silber S, Isobe Y, Kuwayama M, Takeda S. Successful ovarian vitrification and back-transplantation to preserve fertility in a patient requiring chemotherapy for malignant lymphoma. J Blood Lymph 2014; 4(1): 116.
[7]     Zhang J, Liu J, Xu KP, Liu B, DiMattina M. Extracorporeal development and ultrarapid freezing of human fetal ova. J Assist Reprod Genet 1995; 12(6): 361-8.
[8]     Isachenko V, Isachenko E, Reinsberg J, Montag M, van der Ven K, Dorn C, Roesing B, van der Ven H. Cryopreservation of human ovarian tissue: comparison of rapid and conventional freezing. Cryobiology 2007; 55(3): 261-8.
[9]     Klocke S, Bündgen N, Köster F, Eichenlaub-Ritter U, Griesinger G. Slow-freezing versus vitrification for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2015; 291(2): 419-26.
[10] Wang Y, Xiao Z, Li L, Fan W, Li SW. Novel needle immersed vitrification: a practical and convenient method with potential advantages in mouse and human ovarian tissue cryopreservation. Hum Reprod 2008; 23(10): 2256-65.
[11] Xiao Z, Wang Y, Li L, Luo S, Li SW. Needle immersed vitrification can lower the concentration of cryoprotectant in human ovarian tissue cryopreservation. Fertil Steril 2010; 94(6): 2323-8.
[12] Herraiz S, Novella-Maestre E, Rodríguez B, Díaz C, Sánchez-Serrano M, Mirabet V, Pellicer A. Improving ovarian tissue cryopreservation for oncologic patients: slow freezing versus vitrification, effect of different procedures and devices. Fertil Steril 2014; 101(3): 775-84.
[13] Suzuki N, Yoshioka N, Takae S, Sugishita Y, Tamura M, Hashimoto S, Morimoto Y, Kawamura K. Successful fertility preservation following ovarian tissue vitrification in patients with primary ovarian insufficiency. Hum Reprod 2015; 30(3): 608-15.
[14] Dittrich R, Beckmann MW, Mueller A, Binder H, Hoffmann I, Maltaris T. Uterus cryopreservation: maintenance of uterine contractility by the use of different cryoprotocols. Reprod Domest Anim 2010; 45(1): 86-91.
[15] Kagawa N, Silber S, Kuwayama M. Successful vitrification of bovine and human ovarian tissue. Reprod Biomed Online 2009; 18(4): 568-77.
[16] Sheikhi M, Hultenby K, Niklasson B, Lundqvist M, Hovatta O. Clinical grade vitrification of human ovarian tissue: an ultrastructural analysis of follicles and stroma in vitrified tissue. Hum Reprod 2011; 26(3): 594-603.
[17] Fortune JE. The early stages of follicular development: activation of primordial follicles and growth of preantral follicles. Anim Reprod Sci 2003; 78(3-4): 135-63.
[18] Fossum GT, Davidson A, Paulson RJ. Ovarian hyperstimulation inhibits embryo implantation in the mouse. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf 1989; 6(1): 7-10.
[19] Macklon NS, Fauser BC. Impact of ovarian hyperstimulation on the luteal phase. J Reprod Fertil Suppl 2000; 55: 101-8.
[20] Bourgain C, Devroey P. The endometrium in stimulated cycles for IVF. Hum Reprod Update 2003; 9(6): 515-22.
[21] Polan ML, Daniele A, Russell JB, DeCherney AH. Ovulation induction with human menopausal gonadotropin compared to human urinary follicle-stimulating hormone results in a significant shift in follicular fluid androgen levels without discernible differences in granulosa-luteal cell function. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1986; 63(6): 1284-91.
[22] Brannian J, Eyster K, Mueller BA, Bietz MG, Hansen K. Differential gene expression in human granulosa cells from recombinant FSH versus human menopausal gonadotropin ovarian stimulation protocols. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2010; 8: 25.
[23] Zhao P, Qiao J, Huang S, Zhang Y, Liu S, Yan LY, Hsueh AJ, Duan EK. Gonadotrophin-induced paracrine regulation of human oocyte maturation by BDNF and GDNF secreted by granulosa cells. Hum Reprod 2011; 26(3): 695-702.
[24] Borgbo T, Povlsen BB, Andersen CY, Borup R, Humaidan P, Grøndahl ML. Comparison of gene expression profiles in granulosa and cumulus cells after ovulation induction with either human chorionic gonadotropin or a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist trigger. Fertil Steril 2013; 100(4): 994-1001.
[25] Vuong TN, Phung HT2, Ho MT. Recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone and recombinant luteinizing hormone versus recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone alone during GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation in patients aged ≥35 years: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2015; 30(5): 1188-95.
[26] Telfer EE, McLaughlin M, Ding C, Thong KJ. A two-step serum-free culture system supports development of human oocytes from primordial follicles in the presence of activin. Hum Reprod 2008; 23(5): 1151-8.
[27] Abdollahi M, Salehnia M, Salehpour S, Ghorbanmehr N. Human ovarian tissue vitrification/warming has minor effect on the expression of apoptosis-related genes. Iran Biomed J 2013; 17(4): 179-86. (Persian)
[28] Carleton HM. Carletons histological technique. 5th edition, Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1980; p: 183.
[29] Gougeon A. Regulation of ovarian follicular development in primates: facts and hypotheses. Endocr Rev 1996; 17(2): 121-55.
[30] Hansen KR, Craig LB, Zavy MT, Klein NA, Soules MR. Ovarian primordial and nongrowing follicle counts according to the Stages of Reproductive Aging Workshop (STRAW) staging system. Menopause 2012; 19(2): 164-71.
[31] Rodgers RJ, Irving-Rodgers HF. Morphological classification of bovine ovarian follicles. Reproduction 2010; 139(2): 309-18.
[32] Tingen C, Kim A, Woodruff TK. The primordial pool of follicles and nest breakdown in mammalian ovaries. Mol Hum Reprod 2009; 15(12): 795-803.
[33] Amorim CA, Dolmans MM, David A, Jaeger J, Vanacker J, Camboni A, Donnez J, Van Langendonckt A. Vitrification and xenografting of human ovarian tissue. Fertil Steril 2012; 98(5): 1291-8.e1-2.
Pathobiology Reserach
Volume 18, Issue 3
October 2015
Pages 15-26