A randomized controlled trial comparing embryo vitrification with slush nitrogen to liquid nitrogen in women undergoing frozen embryo transfer: embryology and clinical outcomes
- PMID: 39836897
- DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deaf003
A randomized controlled trial comparing embryo vitrification with slush nitrogen to liquid nitrogen in women undergoing frozen embryo transfer: embryology and clinical outcomes
Abstract
Study question: Does the use of slush nitrogen (SN) for embryo vitrification improve embryo transfer outcomes compared to liquid nitrogen (LN)?
Summary answer: SN is a safe method for embryo preservation and significantly improves post-warming survival rates during repeated vitrification-warming cycles; however, after a single freeze-thaw cycle, pregnancy outcomes are not improved when embryos are vitrified with SN compared to LN.
What is known already: SN is a combination of solid and LN, with a temperature lower than regular LN, and it is an alternative to conventional LN in achieving a faster cooling speed. Studies have shown that SN improves survival in non-human embryos and human oocytes. However, it is unknown whether the use of SN reduces blastocyst damage in humans during vitrification-as indicated by increased survival across multiple vitrification-warming cycles-or whether it enhances pregnancy outcomes in a single vitrification-warming cycle.
Study design, size, duration: Following the pre-clinical trial assessing embryo survival after repeated freeze-thaw cycles using SN and LN on 50 donated embryos per group, a randomized controlled trial was performed, where 253 patients were enrolled between September 2020 and January 2022, and 245 underwent an IVF stimulation, which resulted in at least one blastocyst for cryopreservation. Of those, 121 were allocated to the SN (study), and 124 were allocated to the LN (control) group. Randomization occurred on the day of blastocyst biopsy using a computer-generated block schema. Groups were assigned via opaque envelopes, opened by the embryologist on vitrification day. The patient, physician, and clinical team were blinded to the intervention.
Participants/materials, setting, methods: All couples with female aged between 18 and 42 years old undergoing IVF stimulation at one university-affiliated infertility center, with plan for preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy and subsequent single, frozen embryo transfer (FET) were eligible for inclusion in this study.
Main results and the role of chance: The pre-clinical trial demonstrated significant improvements in blastocyst survival, with the SN group achieving a mean of 7.5 survived vitrification-warming cycles (range: 3-22), significantly surpassing the mean of 3.0 cycles (range: 0-10) in the LN group (P < 0.0001). Following the pre-clinical trial, 223 patients randomized to SN or LN underwent single FET. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, as were embryology outcomes, including the number of oocytes retrieved, mature oocytes, fertilization rate, and total blastocysts biopsied. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, sustained implantation rate, or miscarriage rate (P = 0.16, 0.80, 0.49, and 0.74, respectively, using Student's t-test). A futility analysis indicated no value in continuing recruitment and therefore the study was closed.
Limitations, reasons for caution: Neonatal or birth outcomes were not assessed. Termination of the study based on futility analysis precludes a conclusion of equivalence between SN and LN.
Wider implications of the findings: This study demonstrates that SN is a safe alternative to traditional LN for vitrification; however, it did not demonstrate improvements in the reproductive potential of vitrified embryos.
Study funding/competing interest(s): The project was funded by the Foundation for Embryonic Competence.
Trial registration number: NCT04496284.
Trial registration date: 3 August 2020.
Date of first patient’s enrollment: 5 September 2020.
Keywords: Leiden frost effect; embryo vitrification; frozen embryo transfer; liquid nitrogen; osmotic injury; pregnancy outcomes; slush nitrogen.
© The Author(s) 2025. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.
Similar articles
-
The clinical impact of oligozoospermia in oocyte donation ICSI cycles using preimplantation genetic test for aneuploidy.Hum Reprod. 2025 Jul 1;40(7):1282-1290. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deaf080. Hum Reprod. 2025. PMID: 40359305
-
Oocyte, embryo and blastocyst cryopreservation in ART: systematic review and meta-analysis comparing slow-freezing versus vitrification to produce evidence for the development of global guidance.Hum Reprod Update. 2017 Mar 1;23(2):139-155. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmw038. Hum Reprod Update. 2017. PMID: 27827818 Free PMC article.
-
Estradiol and progesterone levels in early pregnancy after modified natural, programmed, and gonadotrophin-stimulated frozen embryo transfer cycles: a randomized controlled trial.Hum Reprod. 2025 Jul 1;40(7):1291-1304. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deaf083. Hum Reprod. 2025. PMID: 40389227 Clinical Trial.
-
Early embryo developmental kinetics following IVF versus ICSI in patients without severe male factor infertility: a secondary analysis of a multicentre, randomized controlled trial (INVICSI).Hum Reprod. 2025 Aug 11:deaf157. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deaf157. Online ahead of print. Hum Reprod. 2025. PMID: 40796141
-
Cleavage-stage versus blastocyst-stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 May 19;5(5):CD002118. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002118.pub6. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 35588094 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Associated data
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials