Vitrification and Slow Freezing for Cryopreservation of Blastocyst

NCT ID: NCT02068924

Last Updated: 2014-02-24

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

UNKNOWN

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

100 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2014-02-28

Study Completion Date

2018-03-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Improvement in the treatment of infertility by Assisted Reproductive Techniques (ART) allows single embryo transfer to be applied without compromising pregnancy rates after the first in vitro fertilization (IVF) or Intra Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) attempt in women less than 36 years old with good embryo quality. The policy of transferring more than one embryo after IVF or ICSI has been the main reason for the numerous twin or triple pregnancies reported in Europe and United States over the past 15 years. These multiple pregnancies are the main disadvantage of ART because of their negative impact on obstetrical, neonatal and economic outcome. In the past, embryos were replaced in the uterus on either Day-2 or 3 of development at the cleavage stage. With the development of physiologically-based sequential culture media, it has also been suggested that extending embryo culture to Day-5 in order to transfer the embryo at the blastocyst stage would enhance the likelihood of pregnancy. Nevertheless, it has been observed higher pregnancy rate after the transfer of fresh blastocyst but not after the transfer of thawed blastocyst frozen by slow freezing procedure.

However a recent embryo freezing technique (vitrification) seems to show significant higher pregnancy rates when blastocyst are frozen by this method. To our knowledge, no publications have reported the outcome of single embryo transfer at blastocyst stage by a prospective randomized and comparative study including the results of fresh and frozen/thawed blastocyst by these two methods (slow freezing vs. vitrification) in case of single embryo transfer .

Therefore, the aim of our study is to analyze whether extended culture of Day-2 top embryos to blastocyst-stage may improve the cumulative delivery rate in an in vitro fertilization program with Single Embryo Transfer policy in a prospective and randomized study integrating the transfer of fresh and frozen/thawed embryos using a slow freezing versus vitrification procedure.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Improvement in the treatment of infertility by Assisted Reproductive Techniques (ART) allows single embryo transfer to be applied without compromising pregnancy rates after the first in vitro fertilization (IVF) or Intra Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) attempt in women less than 36 years old with good embryo quality. The policy of transferring more than one embryo after IVF or ICSI has been the main reason for the numerous twin or triple pregnancies reported in Europe and United States over the past 15 years. These multiple pregnancies are the main disadvantage of ART because of their negative impact on obstetrical, neonatal and economic outcome. In the past, embryos were replaced in the uterus on either Day-2 or 3 of development at the cleavage stage. With the development of physiologically-based sequential culture media, it has also been suggested that extending embryo culture to Day-5 in order to transfer the embryo at the blastocyst stage would enhance the likelihood of pregnancy. Nevertheless, it has been observed higher pregnancy rate after the transfer of fresh blastocyst but not after the transfer of thawed blastocyst frozen by slow freezing procedure.

However a recent embryo freezing technique (vitrification) seems to show significant higher pregnancy rates when blastocyst are frozen by this method. To our knowledge, no publications have reported the outcome of single embryo transfer at blastocyst stage by a prospective randomized and comparative study including the results of fresh and frozen/thawed blastocyst by these two methods (slow freezing vs. vitrification) in case of single embryo transfer .

Therefore, the aim of our study is to analyze whether extended culture of Day-2 top embryos to blastocyst-stage may improve the cumulative delivery rate in an in vitro fertilization program with Single Embryo Transfer policy in a prospective and randomized study integrating the transfer of fresh and frozen/thawed embryos using a slow freezing versus vitrification procedure.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Infertility

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

slow freezing

Therefore, the aim of our study is to analyze whether extended culture of Day-2 top embryos to blastocyst-stage may improve the cumulative delivery rate in an in vitro fertilization program with Single Embryo Transfer policy in a prospective and randomized study integrating the transfer of fresh and frozen/thawed embryos using a slow freezing versus vitrification procedure.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Slow freezing versus vitrification

Intervention Type OTHER

vitrification

Therefore, the aim of our study is to analyze whether extended culture of Day-2 top embryos to blastocyst-stage may improve the cumulative delivery rate in an in vitro fertilization program with Single Embryo Transfer policy in a prospective and randomized study integrating the transfer of fresh and frozen/thawed embryos using a slow freezing versus vitrification procedure.

Group Type OTHER

Slow freezing versus vitrification

Intervention Type OTHER

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Slow freezing versus vitrification

Intervention Type OTHER

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Slow freezing: G Freeze Kit Blast, Vitrolife, Suede G-Thaw-kit Blast, Vitrolife, Suede Vitrification: RapidVit Blast, Vitrolife, Suede Rapidwam Blast, Vitrolife, Suede

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* woman \< 36 years old
* first IVF or ICSI attempt with ejaculated sperm
* at least 5 ovocytes at the pick up
* at least 3 top embryos at day-2
* at least one supernumerary blastocyst with good quality at day-5 or day-6

Exclusion Criteria

* \- woman : FSH \>12UI/l
* ICSI with epididymal or testicular spermatozoa
* None supernumerary blastocyst with good quality at day-5 or day-6
* Refuse by the couple to have an embryo transfer at day-5
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

36 Years

Eligible Sex

FEMALE

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Vitrolife

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role collaborator

University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Brugnon Florence

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

CHU de Clermont-Ferrand

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

CHU de Clermont-Ferrand

Clermont-Ferrand, , France

Site Status RECRUITING

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

France

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Patrick LACARIN

Role: CONTACT

04 73 75 11 95

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Patrick LACARIN

Role: primary

04 73 75 11 95

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

CHU-0181

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.