Comparison of outcomes after vitrification using DMSO or PrOH.

More and more clinics are now discovering our products, VitriBlast and ThermoBlast for vitrification of blastocysts.

One of them is IVF clinic Falun, a private clinic in Sweden. They presented a study at the Nordic meeting earlier this year where they had compared slow freezing and vitrification using DMSO and vitrification using PrOH.

Background: The clinic has successfully used slow freezing for cryopreservation of blastocyst and before implementing a new method the methods were evaluated.

Study question: Does slow freezing of human blastocysts give comparable results to those of vitrification? Does vitrification with DMSO yield better results than with PrOH?

Main outcome measures: Cryosurvival, implantation and birth rates.

Design and setting: Prospective randomized pilot study at a private IVF clinic.

Methods: 300 IVF cycles were randomized into three groups, slow freezing, vitrification with DMSO and vitrification with PrOH.

Blastocysts were frozen or vitrified according to the clinic’s protocol using a closed system. The frozen cycles were conducted with single embryo transfers.

Results: The results showed no significant difference between groups with regards to implantation and live birth rates. Blastocysts vitrified with DMSO showed significantly higher survival rates than blastocyst vitrified with PrOH.