Transvaginal Follicle Aspiration in Mares: A Description of Different Techniques and Comparison of Results Across Different OPU Clinics.

IF 1.6 3区 农林科学 Q2 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE
Juan Cuervo-Arango, Denis Necchi, Amber Clutton-Brock, Magdalena Profaska, James Crabtree, Anthony Claes
{"title":"Transvaginal Follicle Aspiration in Mares: A Description of Different Techniques and Comparison of Results Across Different OPU Clinics.","authors":"Juan Cuervo-Arango, Denis Necchi, Amber Clutton-Brock, Magdalena Profaska, James Crabtree, Anthony Claes","doi":"10.1111/rda.70043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This retrospective clinical study describes different techniques for transvaginal follicle aspiration in mares and compares results from 5 different commercial ovum pick-up (OPU) clinics in which the same operator aspirated mares using different systems and equipment: Clinic 1 (n = 42 mares, two-operator OPU technique, double-lumen-echogenic-tip needle, and manual syringe-assisted flushing of follicles), Clinic 2 (n = 28 mares, single-operator-OPU-technique, double-lumen-echogenic-tip needle, infusion pump controlled by foot-pedal for follicle flushing), Clinic 3 (n = 18 mares, single-operator-OPU-technique, double-lumen-echogenic-tip needle, and manual syringe-assisted flushing of follicles), Clinic 4 (n = 24 mares, single-operator-OPU-technique, double-lumen-non-echogenic-tip needle, and manual syringe-assisted flushing of follicles), and Clinic 5 (n = 9 mares, aspirated as in Clinic 1). The ease of performing OPU (visibility of needle tip and difficulty to hold ovary, probe, and needle) and the mean number of recovered oocytes were compared between clinics. The mean number of recovered oocytes per mare and oocytes per follicle for clinics 1-5 were 11.9 ± 4.6 and 64%, 13.5 ± 6.5 and 53%, 12.3 ± 4.2 and 54%, 9.5 ± 3.3 and 51%, and 19.9 ± 8.2 and 64%, respectively. The combined recovered oocyte per aspirated follicle was 10% higher in clinics with a 2-operator technique (clinic 1 and 5, 63.63%) than in clinics with the single-operator technique (clinics 2-4, 53.32%). The mean number of recovered oocytes was numerically greater in the clinics using the echogenic needle tip (11.9, 13.5, 12.3, and 19.9 oocytes per mare, for clinics 1, 2, 3, and 5, respectively) than in the clinic using the non-echogenic needle tip; (9.5 oocytes per mare for clinic 4). The use of a plastic syringe or an infusion pump to flush follicles did not appear to affect the number of recovered oocytes or oocyte recovery rate (clinic 2 vs. 3). The left arm of the single operator (holding OPU probe and needle) experienced fatigue more frequently when mares were aspirated singly, than when the needle was managed by a second operator. In conclusion, the oocyte per follicle recovery was 10% lower in clinics using a single-operator-OPU-technique compared with clinics using a two-operator-technique.</p>","PeriodicalId":21035,"journal":{"name":"Reproduction in Domestic Animals","volume":"60 3","pages":"e70043"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reproduction in Domestic Animals","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rda.70043","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This retrospective clinical study describes different techniques for transvaginal follicle aspiration in mares and compares results from 5 different commercial ovum pick-up (OPU) clinics in which the same operator aspirated mares using different systems and equipment: Clinic 1 (n = 42 mares, two-operator OPU technique, double-lumen-echogenic-tip needle, and manual syringe-assisted flushing of follicles), Clinic 2 (n = 28 mares, single-operator-OPU-technique, double-lumen-echogenic-tip needle, infusion pump controlled by foot-pedal for follicle flushing), Clinic 3 (n = 18 mares, single-operator-OPU-technique, double-lumen-echogenic-tip needle, and manual syringe-assisted flushing of follicles), Clinic 4 (n = 24 mares, single-operator-OPU-technique, double-lumen-non-echogenic-tip needle, and manual syringe-assisted flushing of follicles), and Clinic 5 (n = 9 mares, aspirated as in Clinic 1). The ease of performing OPU (visibility of needle tip and difficulty to hold ovary, probe, and needle) and the mean number of recovered oocytes were compared between clinics. The mean number of recovered oocytes per mare and oocytes per follicle for clinics 1-5 were 11.9 ± 4.6 and 64%, 13.5 ± 6.5 and 53%, 12.3 ± 4.2 and 54%, 9.5 ± 3.3 and 51%, and 19.9 ± 8.2 and 64%, respectively. The combined recovered oocyte per aspirated follicle was 10% higher in clinics with a 2-operator technique (clinic 1 and 5, 63.63%) than in clinics with the single-operator technique (clinics 2-4, 53.32%). The mean number of recovered oocytes was numerically greater in the clinics using the echogenic needle tip (11.9, 13.5, 12.3, and 19.9 oocytes per mare, for clinics 1, 2, 3, and 5, respectively) than in the clinic using the non-echogenic needle tip; (9.5 oocytes per mare for clinic 4). The use of a plastic syringe or an infusion pump to flush follicles did not appear to affect the number of recovered oocytes or oocyte recovery rate (clinic 2 vs. 3). The left arm of the single operator (holding OPU probe and needle) experienced fatigue more frequently when mares were aspirated singly, than when the needle was managed by a second operator. In conclusion, the oocyte per follicle recovery was 10% lower in clinics using a single-operator-OPU-technique compared with clinics using a two-operator-technique.

母马经阴道卵泡抽吸:不同技术的描述和不同OPU诊所结果的比较。
本回顾性临床研究描述了对母马进行经阴道卵泡抽吸的不同技术,并比较了5个不同的商业取卵(OPU)诊所的结果,在这些诊所中,同一操作员使用不同的系统和设备对母马进行抽吸。诊所1 (n = 42母马,two-operator含油率技术,double-lumen-echogenic-tip针,和手动syringe-assisted冲洗滤泡),诊所2 (n = 28母马,single-operator-OPU-technique double-lumen-echogenic-tip针,输液泵控制脚踏板卵泡冲洗),诊所3 (n = 18母马,single-operator-OPU-technique double-lumen-echogenic-tip针,和手动syringe-assisted冲洗滤泡),诊所4 (n = 24母马,single-operator-OPU-technique,双腔无回声尖针,手动注射器辅助冲洗卵泡)和临床5 (n = 9匹母马,与临床1一样抽吸)。比较临床间进行OPU的难易程度(针尖可见,卵巢、探头和针难以握住)和平均回收卵母细胞数。临床1 ~ 5组平均每母马卵母细胞数和每卵泡卵母细胞数分别为11.9±4.6和64%、13.5±6.5和53%、12.3±4.2和54%、9.5±3.3和51%、19.9±8.2和64%。采用2位操作人员技术的诊所(诊所1和诊所5,63.63%)比采用单位操作人员技术的诊所(诊所2-4,53.32%)每个抽吸卵泡的总卵母细胞回收率高10%。使用超声针尖的诊所平均回收的卵母细胞数量比使用非超声针尖的诊所多(分别为11.9、13.5、12.3和19.9个卵母细胞,分别为1、2、3和5诊所);(临床4每匹母马9.5个卵母细胞)。使用塑料注射器或输液泵冲洗卵泡似乎不影响恢复的卵母细胞数量或卵母细胞回收率(临床2 vs. 3)。当母马单独抽吸时,单个操作人员(持有OPU探针和针头)的左臂比由第二个操作人员管理针头时更容易疲劳。总之,与使用双操作人员技术的诊所相比,使用单操作人员opu技术的诊所每个卵泡的卵母细胞回收率低10%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Reproduction in Domestic Animals
Reproduction in Domestic Animals 农林科学-奶制品与动物科学
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
238
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal offers comprehensive information concerning physiology, pathology, and biotechnology of reproduction. Topical results are currently published in original papers, reviews, and short communications with particular attention to investigations on practicable techniques. Carefully selected reports, e. g. on embryo transfer and associated biotechnologies, gene transfer, and spermatology provide a link between basic research and clinical application. The journal applies to breeders, veterinarians, and biologists, and is also of interest in human medicine. Interdisciplinary cooperation is documented in the proceedings of the joint annual meetings. Fields of interest: Animal reproduction and biotechnology with special regard to investigations on applied and clinical research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信