Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39436484›Full record

ReviewJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2024

Cryopreservation, cryoprotectants, and potential risk of epigenetic alteration.

Romualdo Sciorio, Clementina Cantatore, Giuseppe D'Amato, Gary D Smith

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Genetic and Epigenetic Risks of Male Infertility in ART.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. 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

4 authors.

Romualdo SciorioFertility Medicine and Gynaecological Endocrinology Unit, Department Woman-Mother-Child, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7698-8823
Clementina CantatoreDepartment of Advanced Reproductive Risk Management and High-Risk Pregnancies, ASL Bari, Reproductive and IVF Unit, PTA Conversano, Conversano, BA, Italy.
Giuseppe D'AmatoDepartment of Advanced Reproductive Risk Management and High-Risk Pregnancies, ASL Bari, Reproductive and IVF Unit, PTA Conversano, Conversano, BA, Italy.
Gary D SmithDepartments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Physiology, and Urology and Reproductive Sciences Program, University of Michigan, 4742F Medical Sciences II, 1301 E. Catherine Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-056171500, USA. smithgd@med.umich.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4377-3348

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The cryopreservation of gametes and embryos has increased notably over the past 20 years and is now an essential part of assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs). However, because the cryopreservation process is un-physiological for human cells, gametes, and embryos, cryobiologists have suggested diverse methods to successfully cryopreserve human gametes and embryos in order to maintain their viability and assure successful pregnancy. During the first period of early development, major waves of epigenetic reprogramming-crucial for the fate of the embryo-occur. Recently, concerns relating to the increased incidence of epigenetic anomalies and genomic-imprinting disorders have been reported after ARTs and cryopreservation. Epigenetic reprogramming is particularly susceptible to environmental and un-physiological conditions such as ovarian stimulation, embryo culture, and cryopreservation that might collectively affect epigenetics dysregulation. Additionally, recent literature suggests that epigenetic and transcriptomic profiles are sensitive to the stress induced by vitrification, osmotic shock, oxidative stress, rapid temperature and pH changes, and cryoprotectants; it is therefore critical to have a more comprehensive understanding of the potential induced perturbations of epigenetic modifications that may be associated with vitrification. The aim of this paper is to present a critical evaluation of the association of gamete and embryo cryopreservation, use of cryoprotectants, and epigenetic dysregulations with potential long-term consequences for offspring health.

Indexed as

CryopreservationCryoprotective AgentsEpigenesis, GeneticReproductive Techniques, AssistedFemaleGerm CellsHumansPregnancyVitrificationCryoprotective AgentsAssisted reproductive technologiesCryoprotectantsHuman oocyte and embryo cryopreservationInfertilityRisk of epigenetic dysregulationVitrification

Identifiers

PMID39436484
PMCPMC11621268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.