Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26211782›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of reproduction and development2015

A comparison of different vitrification devices and the effect of blastocoele collapse on the cryosurvival of in vitro produced porcine embryos.

Louise Katherine Bartolac, Jenna Louise Lowe, George Koustas, Cecilia Sjöblom, Christopher Gerald Grupen

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of reproduction and development, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Louise Katherine BartolacFaculty of Veterinary Science, The University of Sydney, NSW 2570, Australia.
Jenna Louise Lowe
George Koustas
Cecilia Sjöblom
Christopher Gerald Grupen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the optimum conditions for vitrifying in vitro produced day 7 porcine embryos using different vitrification devices and blastocoele collapse methods. Firstly embryos were collapsed by micro-pipetting, needle puncture and sucrose with and without conducting vitrification. In the next experiment, non-collapsed embryos were vitrified in an open device using either superfine open-pulled straws (SOPS) or the CryoLoop(TM) system, or vitrified in a closed device using either the CryoTip(TM) or Cryo Bio(TM)'s high security vitrification system (HSV). The post-thaw survival of embryos vitrified in the open devices did not differ significantly (SOPS: 37.3%; CryoLoop(TM): 37.3%) nor did the post-thaw survival of embryos vitrified in the closed devices (CryoTip™: 38.5%; HSV: 42.5%). The re-expansion rate of embryos that were collapsed via micro-pipetting (76.0%) did not differ from those that were punctured (75.0%) or collapsed via sucrose (79.6%) when vitrification was not performed. However, embryos collapsed via sucrose solutions (24.5%) and needle puncture (16.0%) prior to vitrification were significantly less likely to survive vitrification than the control (non-collapsed) embryos (53.6%, P < 0.05). The findings show that both open and closed vitrification devices were equally effective for the vitrification of porcine blastocysts. Collapsing blastocysts prior to vitrification did not improve survival, which is inconsistent with the findings of studies in other species. This may be due to the extremely sensitive nature of porcine embryos, and/or the invasiveness of the collapsing procedures.

Indexed as

VitrificationAnimalsBlastocystEmbryo, MammalianPreservation, BiologicalSwine

Identifiers

PMID26211782
PMCPMC4685218

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.