No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Comparative study of intracytoplasmic sperm injection using the traditional holding and the oocyte-holding pipette without aspiration
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 January 2024
Summary
Despite the high level of standardization of the intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) technique, there are some aspects that deserve special attention and should still be improved. The major drawback of the technique is its invasiveness, as during cytoplasmic aspiration different structures of the oocyte may be lost or damaged. This is partly because the microtools used in ICSI were not specially designed for assisted reproduction but for other medical–biological disciplines. In view of the above caveats, the aim of the study was to compare the results of ICSI with the traditional oocyte-holding pipette and the oocyte-holding pipette without aspiration (PiWA). In total, 155 patients and 1037 oocytes were included in the study. In each ICSI cycle, half of the oocytes were microinjected using a traditional holding pipette and the other half using a PiWA. In result, the PiWA technique produced a significant increase in the fertilization rate: 88.12% (95%CI: 84.62–90.92%); holding pipette: 73.33% (95%CI: 68.72–77.49%). Also, it produced a significant decrease in the embryo degeneration rate compared with the traditional holding pipette [PiWA: 2.07% (95%CI: 1.11–3.8%); holding pipette: 4.51% (95%CI: 3.06–6.59%)]. Pregnancy rate depended on the holding technique used, both in single embryo transfers (n = 59; χ2 = 4.608; P-value = 0.032) and double embryo transfers (n = 156; χ2 = 4.344; P-value = 0.037); with PiWA presenting a significantly higher pregnancy rate than the traditional holding technique. Based on current evidence and the present results, improvements should focus on decreasing the invasiveness of the microinjection itself by minimizing or avoiding aspiration and cytoplasmic disorganization, as is successfully achieved with PiWA.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press
Footnotes
*
Permanent Professor of University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
References
Alvarez, G. M., Villanueva, S., Geller, M., Cetica, P. and Dalvit, G. (2018). Piezo-ICSI as alternative tool to improve oocyte activation in in vitro matured bovine oocytes model. Fertility and Sterility, 110(4), e217. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.07.626
CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. and Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braga, D. P. A. F., Setti, A. S., Figueira, R. C. S., Azevedo, M., Iaconelli, A. Jr., Lo Turco, E. G. L. and Borges, E. Jr. (2016). Freeze-all, oocyte vitrification, or fresh embryo transfer? Lessons from an egg-sharing donation program. Fertility and Sterility, 106(3), 615–622. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.05.004
CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dragulescu, A. and Arendt, C. (2020). Xlsx: Read, write, format excel 2007 and excel 97/2000/XP/2003 files.Google Scholar
Dumoulin, J. M., Coonen, E., Bras, M., Bergers-Janssen, J. M., Ignoul-Vanvuchelen, R. C., van Wissen, L. C., Geraedts, J. P. and Evers, J. L. H. (2001). Embryo development and chromosomal anomalies after ICSI: Effect of the injection procedure. Human Reproduction, 16(2), 306–312. doi: 10.1093/humrep/16.2.306
CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fernández, J., Pedrosa, C., Vergara, F., Nieto, A. I., Quintas, A., Fernández, A., Moyano, C., Fernández, A. and Ponce, J. (2020). A new oocyte-holding pipette for intracytoplasmic sperm injection without cytoplasmic aspiration: An experimental study in mouse oocytes. Reproductive Biology, 20(4), 584–588. doi: 10.1016/j.repbio.2020.07.008
CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hiraoka, K., Tamaki, T., Matsumura, Y., Kiriake, C., Uto, H., Yoshida, H. and Kitamura, S. (2012). Impact of the volume of cytoplasm aspirated into the injection pipette at the time of oolemma breakage on the fertilization rate after ICSI: A preliminary study. Journal of Mammalian Ova Research, 29(1), 82–87. doi: 10.1274/jmor.29.82
CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lacal, J. C., Perona, R. and Feramisco, J. (1999). Microinjection. Springer Link.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lüdecke, D. (2018). Ggeffects: Tidy data frames of marginal effects from regression models. Journal of Open Source Software, 3(26), 772. doi: 10.21105/joss.00772
CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maldonado Rosas, I., Anagnostopoulou, C., Singh, N., Gugnani, N., Singh, K., Desai, D., Darbandi, M., Manoharan, M., Darbandi, S., Chockalingam, A., Leonardi Diaz, S. I., Gupta, S., Kuroda, S., Finelli, R., Sallam, H. N., Wirka, K. A., Boitrelle, F. and Agarwal, A. (2022). Optimizing embryological aspects of oocyte retrieval, oocyte denudation, and embryo loading for transfer. Panminerva Medica, 64(2), 156–170. doi: 10.23736/S0031-0808.22.04675-4
CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nagy, Z. P., Liu, J., Joris, H., Bocken, G., Desmet, B., Van Ranst, H., Vankelecom, A., Devroey, P. and Van Steirteghem, A. C. (1995). The influence of the site of sperm deposition and mode of oolemma breakage at intracytoplasmic sperm injection on fertilization and embryo development rates. Human Reproduction, 10(12), 3171–3177. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a135881
CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Palermo, G., Joris, H., Devroey, P. and Van Steirteghem, A. C. (1992). Pregnancies after intracytoplasmic injection of single spermatozoon into an oocyte. Lancet, 340(8810), 17–18. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(92)92425-f
CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peultier, A. S., Fréour, T., Cazenave, N. and Barrière, P. (2015). Fertilization failure in IVF and ICSI. Journal de Gynécologie, Obstétrique et Biologie de la Reproduction, 44(4), 380–386. doi: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2014.07.010
CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Rubino, P., Viganò, P., Luddi, A. and Piomboni, P. (2016). The ICSI procedure from past to future: A systematic review of the more controversial aspects. Human Reproduction Update, 22(2), 194–227. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmv050
Google ScholarPubMed
Verpoest, W. and Tournaye, H. (2006). ICSI: Hype or hazard? Human Fertility, 9(2), 81–92. doi: 10.1080/14647270500422158
CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wickham, H. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer-Verlag New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yanagida, K., Katayose, H., Yazawa, H., Kimura, Y., Konnai, K. and Sato, A. (1999). The usefulness of a piezo-micromanipulator in intracytoplasmic sperm injection in humans. Human Reproduction, 14(2), 448–453. doi: 10.1093/humrep/14.2.448
CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yanagida, K., Katayose, H., Hirata, S., Yazawa, H., Hayashi, S. and Sato, A. (2001). Influence of sperm immobilization on onset of Ca2+ oscillations after ICSI. Human Reproduction, 16(1), 148–152. doi: 10.1093/humrep/16.1.148
CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zander-Fox, D., Lam, K., Pacella-Ince, L., Tully, C., Hamilton, H., Hiraoka, K., McPherson, N. O. and Tremellen, K. (2021). PIEZO-ICSI increases fertilization rates compared with standard ICSI: A prospective cohort study. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 43(3), 404–412. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2021.05.020
CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vergara et al. supplementary material
Vergara et al. supplementary material 1
Audio
45.8 MB
Vergara et al. supplementary material
Vergara et al. supplementary material 2
File
33.3 KB
Vergara et al. supplementary material
Vergara et al. supplementary material 3
File
33.5 KB