ArticleReproduction in domestic animals = Zuchthygiene2025
Evaluation of Different Cryoprotectant Combinations in Testicular Vitrification in Dogs.
Article in Reproduction in domestic animals = Zuchthygiene, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Testicular vitrification requires the use of high concentrations of cryoprotectants, which can cause damage to samples due to their toxicity. The combination of these substances comes up as a way to mitigate this problem. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate three cryoprotectant combinations in the testicular vitrification of dogs. Ten testicular pairs from adult dogs were used, from which 12 fragments of each pair were obtained, distributed among the fresh control group (CTR) and the experimental groups according to the cryoprotectant combinations tested: dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)/ethylene glycol (EG), DMSO/glycerol (GLY), and EG/GLY. The fragments were vitrified using the solid surface vitrification method (SSV), at a final concentration of 5.6 mol/L of the combined cryoprotectants. Subsequently, they were warmed up and processed for histomorphological morphometric evaluations and determination of mitochondrial activity with Rhodamine 123. Considering the morphological evaluation, the DMSO/EG group showed results similar to CTR, with good scores for nuclear integrity and cell organisation in the seminiferous tubules (p > 0.05). In contrast, the EG/GLY group presented greater nuclear condensation. It was difficult to visualise and distinguish between spermatogonia and Sertoli cells (p < 0.05). The DMSO/GLY group also showed distinct levels between spermatogonia and Sertoli cells, as well as nuclear condensation, which statistically differed from CTR (p < 0.05). Also, it was observed a random distribution of the remaining cells in the seminiferous tubules of the EG/GLY and DMSO/GLY groups. The three tested groups showed basement membrane retraction and a reduction of approximately 11.6% in the average diameter of the seminiferous tubules (p < 0.05). Vitrification did not influence the mitochondrial activity of the samples, regardless of the combination of cryoprotectants used (p > 0.05). It was concluded that the DMSO/EG combination best contributed to the maintenance of the testicular histomorphological structure of dogs after vitrification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.