Pauline Jaeger, Cyrielle Fournier, Claire Santamaria, Eloise Fraison, Nicolas Morel-Journel, Mehdi Benchaib, Bruno Salle, Jacqueline Lornage, Elsa Labrune
{"title":"人类卵巢冷冻保存:从组织学到基因表达的玻璃化与缓慢冷冻。","authors":"Pauline Jaeger, Cyrielle Fournier, Claire Santamaria, Eloise Fraison, Nicolas Morel-Journel, Mehdi Benchaib, Bruno Salle, Jacqueline Lornage, Elsa Labrune","doi":"10.1080/14647273.2022.2136540","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cryopreservation of ovarian tissue is one of the strategies offered to girls and women needing gonadotoxic treatment to preserve their fertility. The reference method to cryopreserve is slow freezing; vitrification is an alternative method. The aim was to evaluate which of the two is the best method for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation. Each ovary was divided into three groups: (i) fresh; (ii) slow freezing; and (iii) vitrification. An evaluation of the follicular density, quality and the expression six genes (<i>CYP11A</i>, <i>STAR</i>, <i>GDF9</i>, <i>ZP3</i>, <i>CDK2</i>, <i>CDKN1A</i>) were performed. We observed no significant difference in follicular density within these three groups. Slow freezing altered the primordial follicles compared to the fresh tissue (31.8% vs 55.9%, <i>p</i> = 0.046). The expression of genes involved in steroidogenesis varied after cryopreservation compared to the fresh group; <i>CYP11A</i> was under-expressed in slow freezing group (<i>p</i> = 0.01), <i>STAR</i> was under-expressed in the vitrification group (<i>p</i> = 0.01). Regarding the expression of genes involved in cell cycle regulation, <i>CDKN1A</i> was significantly under-expressed in both freezing groups (slow freezing: <i>p</i> = 0.0008; vitrification: <i>p</i> = 0.03). Vitrification had no effect on the histological quality of the follicles at any stage of development compared to fresh tissue. There was no significant difference in gene expression between the two techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":" ","pages":"1099-1107"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human ovarian cryopreservation: vitrification versus slow freezing from histology to gene expression.\",\"authors\":\"Pauline Jaeger, Cyrielle Fournier, Claire Santamaria, Eloise Fraison, Nicolas Morel-Journel, Mehdi Benchaib, Bruno Salle, Jacqueline Lornage, Elsa Labrune\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14647273.2022.2136540\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Cryopreservation of ovarian tissue is one of the strategies offered to girls and women needing gonadotoxic treatment to preserve their fertility. The reference method to cryopreserve is slow freezing; vitrification is an alternative method. The aim was to evaluate which of the two is the best method for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation. Each ovary was divided into three groups: (i) fresh; (ii) slow freezing; and (iii) vitrification. An evaluation of the follicular density, quality and the expression six genes (<i>CYP11A</i>, <i>STAR</i>, <i>GDF9</i>, <i>ZP3</i>, <i>CDK2</i>, <i>CDKN1A</i>) were performed. We observed no significant difference in follicular density within these three groups. Slow freezing altered the primordial follicles compared to the fresh tissue (31.8% vs 55.9%, <i>p</i> = 0.046). The expression of genes involved in steroidogenesis varied after cryopreservation compared to the fresh group; <i>CYP11A</i> was under-expressed in slow freezing group (<i>p</i> = 0.01), <i>STAR</i> was under-expressed in the vitrification group (<i>p</i> = 0.01). Regarding the expression of genes involved in cell cycle regulation, <i>CDKN1A</i> was significantly under-expressed in both freezing groups (slow freezing: <i>p</i> = 0.0008; vitrification: <i>p</i> = 0.03). Vitrification had no effect on the histological quality of the follicles at any stage of development compared to fresh tissue. There was no significant difference in gene expression between the two techniques.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1099-1107\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2022.2136540\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/11/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2022.2136540","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/11/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Human ovarian cryopreservation: vitrification versus slow freezing from histology to gene expression.
Cryopreservation of ovarian tissue is one of the strategies offered to girls and women needing gonadotoxic treatment to preserve their fertility. The reference method to cryopreserve is slow freezing; vitrification is an alternative method. The aim was to evaluate which of the two is the best method for human ovarian tissue cryopreservation. Each ovary was divided into three groups: (i) fresh; (ii) slow freezing; and (iii) vitrification. An evaluation of the follicular density, quality and the expression six genes (CYP11A, STAR, GDF9, ZP3, CDK2, CDKN1A) were performed. We observed no significant difference in follicular density within these three groups. Slow freezing altered the primordial follicles compared to the fresh tissue (31.8% vs 55.9%, p = 0.046). The expression of genes involved in steroidogenesis varied after cryopreservation compared to the fresh group; CYP11A was under-expressed in slow freezing group (p = 0.01), STAR was under-expressed in the vitrification group (p = 0.01). Regarding the expression of genes involved in cell cycle regulation, CDKN1A was significantly under-expressed in both freezing groups (slow freezing: p = 0.0008; vitrification: p = 0.03). Vitrification had no effect on the histological quality of the follicles at any stage of development compared to fresh tissue. There was no significant difference in gene expression between the two techniques.
期刊介绍:
ACS Applied Bio Materials is an interdisciplinary journal publishing original research covering all aspects of biomaterials and biointerfaces including and beyond the traditional biosensing, biomedical and therapeutic applications.
The journal is devoted to reports of new and original experimental and theoretical research of an applied nature that integrates knowledge in the areas of materials, engineering, physics, bioscience, and chemistry into important bio applications. The journal is specifically interested in work that addresses the relationship between structure and function and assesses the stability and degradation of materials under relevant environmental and biological conditions.