OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficiency of two vitrification protocols for rat immature testicular tissue and heterotopic transplantation. METHODS: Twenty-four pre-pubertal Wistar rats were divided into three groups (n=8). After orchiectomy, testicular fragments (3mm) from Groups 1 and 2 were vitrified with different cryoprotectant concentration solutions, using sterile inoculation loops as support. After warming up, the fragments were submitted to cell viability assessment by Trypan blue and histological evaluation. Vitrified (Groups 1 and 2) and fresh (Group 3) fragments were grafted to the animals periauricular region. After 8 weeks of grafting, the implant site was histologically analyzed. RESULTS: The viability recovery rate from Group 1 (72.09%) was higher (p=0.02) than that from Group 2 (59.19%). Histological analysis showed similar tubular integrity between fresh fragments from Groups 1 and 3. Group 2 samples presented lower tubular integrity. We ran histological analyses in the grafts from the Groups. In all groups, it was possible to see the implant site, however, no fragment of testicular tissue or signs of inflammation were histologically found in most samples from Groups 1 and 3. In one sample from Group 2, we found degenerated seminiferous tubules with necrosis and signs of an inflammatory process. In another sample from Group 2, we found seminiferous tubules in the implant site. CONCLUSION: The vitrification of pre-pubertal testicular tissue of rats showed little damage to cell viability through histological analysis when we used cryoprotectants in a lower concentration. Heterotopic transplantation could not preserve the structural organization of the testicular tissue.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficiency of two vitrification protocols for rat immature testicular tissue and heterotopic transplantation. METHODS: Twenty-four pre-pubertal Wistar rats were divided into three groups (n=8). After orchiectomy, testicular fragments (3mm) from Groups 1 and 2 were vitrified with different cryoprotectant concentration solutions, using sterile inoculation loops as support. After warming up, the fragments were submitted to cell viability assessment by Trypan blue and histological evaluation. Vitrified (Groups 1 and 2) and fresh (Group 3) fragments were grafted to the animals periauricular region. After 8 weeks of grafting, the implant site was histologically analyzed. RESULTS: The viability recovery rate from Group 1 (72.09%) was higher (p=0.02) than that from Group 2 (59.19%). Histological analysis showed similar tubular integrity between fresh fragments from Groups 1 and 3. Group 2 samples presented lower tubular integrity. We ran histological analyses in the grafts from the Groups. In all groups, it was possible to see the implant site, however, no fragment of testicular tissue or signs of inflammation were histologically found in most samples from Groups 1 and 3. In one sample from Group 2, we found degenerated seminiferous tubules with necrosis and signs of an inflammatory process. In another sample from Group 2, we found seminiferous tubules in the implant site. CONCLUSION: The vitrification of pre-pubertal testicular tissue of rats showed little damage to cell viability through histological analysis when we used cryoprotectants in a lower concentration. Heterotopic transplantation could not preserve the structural organization of the testicular tissue.
Infertility is considered a reproductive system disease that consists of an absence
of clinical pregnancy after 12 months of unprotected intercourse (Jose-Miller ).
There are several causes for male infertility, which include gonadotoxic cancer
treatments, such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Such treatments may damage
somatic cells, such as Sertoli cells and germ cells, which can result in temporary
or permanent infertility (Wallace ). The fact that usual treatments for cancer lead
to male infertility makes strategies such as semen cryopreservation in adult men an
approach to preserve these patient's fertility. Prepubertal boys, however, do not
benefit from sperm banking, and they are subjected to the same deleterious effects
of gonadotoxic treatments, making their fertility preservation a challenge (Brinster, 2007).One potential alternative for fertility preservation of these boys is testicular
tissue cryopreservation, as fragments (Brinster,
2007) or cell suspensions (Yango
). It has been suggested the grafting of
cryopreserved testicular fragments, where the germ cells could differentiate and
eventually produce spermatozoa (Brinster,
2007). However, this technique is still considered experimental and with
varied results in testicular tissue samples. Orthotopic and heterotopic
transplantations were successfully performed on ovarian fragments, with reports of
baby births after tissue cryopreservation and transplantation (Sánchez-Serrano ; Silber, 2012).Studies in mice (Wu ), pigs (Kaneko ) and even humans (Unni ; Yango ), demonstrate the efficiency of slow
testicular tissue cryopreservation in preserving cell viability. Vitrification is a
cryopreservation strategy that differs from slow cryopreservation due a vitreous
state formation that provides a sufficient high cooling to the cells forming only
extracellular ice (Pegg, 2005), which would
theoretically prevent ice crystal damage, which happens in slow cryopreservation.
Vitrification has emerged as a promising method to cryopreserve ovarian tissue
(Curaba ;
Herraiz )
and it is poorly reported in the literature as immature testicular tissue
cryopreservation (Curaba ; Poels ).In order to preserve cell survival after storage at low and stable temperatures,
cryoprotectants are used to reduce the chemical damage caused by freezing in slow
cryopreservation and vitrification (Woods ; Rubinsky
). Cryoprotectants used in
cryopreservation methods, however, can be potentially toxic to the cells (Woods ). Dimethyl
Sulfoxide (DMSO) and Ethylene Glycol (EG) cryoprotectants appear to be less toxic in
slow cryopreservation of prepubertal testicular tissue (Unni ). The aim of this study was
to evaluate the efficiency of two distinct vitrification solutions with different
cryoprotectant concentrations in preserving cell viability and assessing heterotopic
grafting results of vitrified testicular fragments.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
After obtaining the approval from the Ethics Committee in Animal Use (ECAU) of the
Vale do Itajaí University through the 001/16 protocol, 24 male Wistar rats in
prepubertal age of approximately 25 days old, were randomly divided in three groups:
Group 1 (Vitrification protocol 1), Group 2 (Vitrification protocol 2) and Group 3
(Control group).
Orchiectomy
For the orchiectomy, the animals were anesthetized with acepromazine 1% (2/kg),
ketamine chloride (35/kg) and xylazine chloride 2% (5/kg) association diluted in
injection water (Schnaider ). The testes were removed by a scrotal
incision; and after the surgical procedure the testes were fragmented in pieces
of approximately 3mm and used as autologous graft into the periauricular region,
immediately after the orchiectomy (Group 3) or were subjected to vitrification
protocols (Groups 1 and 2). After the surgical procedure, two doses of
subcutaneous analgesic 1% ketoprofen (5mg/kg) within a 24h interval (Lu ) was
administrated to each animal.
Cell Viability Assessment
Cell viability of fresh (Groups 1, 2 and 3) and post-vitrification (Groups 1 and
2) fragments was assessed by Trypan Blue Exclusion Assay, using 10 µL of
Trypan Blue vital staining (Sigma-Aldrich, Saint Louis, MO, USA) for each
10µL of digested fragment, enzymatically digested by Trypsin (0.05%) and
Hyaluronidase (1:1) for 5 minutes. The cells were categorized as viable (not
stained) and non-viable (stained) (Yango
).
Testicular Tissue Vitrification
The Group 1 testicular fragments were vitrified with
IngámedⓇ vitrification commercial kit. The tissue
was initially treated with an equilibrium solution (VS1) made up of 7.5% DMSO
and 7.5% EG for 10 minutes at 4ºC. The fragments were then transferred to
a vitrification solution constituted of 15% EG, 15% DMSO and 0.5 M sucrose,
remaining there for 5 minutes at 4ºC (Borges Júnior ).The Group 2 testicular samples were vitrified with the Santos vitrification
solution and the fragments were first exposed to an equilibrium solution
constituted of 10% of DMSO, 10% of EG, Sucrose 0,25M e HTF (Human Tube
Fluid)-Modified (IrvineⓇ) + 10% SFB for 7 minutes at
4ºC. Later, the fragments were transferred to a vitrification solution
composed of 20% DMSO, 20% EG, 0,5M Sucrose e HTF-Modified + 10% SFB for 3
minutes at 4ºC.Fragments from both groups were then transferred to a sterile inoculation loop of
1µL (OlenⓇ) that served as support, and were immersed
into precooled cryovials (KASVIⓇ) with liquid nitrogen (LN2).
Cryovials were closed and stored in LN2 for 60 days.
Warming
Group 1 testicular fragments were retrieved from the cryovials and immersed in
IngámedⓇ warming solution (DV1), exposed for 1
minute at 37ºC. The fragments were then transferred to a warming solution
(DV2) for 5 minutes, proceeded by a warming solution (DV3) for another 5 minutes
(Borges Júnior ). The samples were then subjected to cell
viability assessment or grafted into the periauricular region.The Group 2 testicular fragments were immersed in HTF-modified (Irvine
Scientific) + SFB + 1M sucrose for 1 minute at 37ºC, and were exposed to
solutions with decreasing sucrose concentration right after (0.5 M, 0.3 M) for 5
minutes each. The fragments were then transferred to an HTF-modified (Irvine
Scientific) + SFB for 5 minutes (Poels
). The fragments were subjected to
cell viability assessment, histological analysis or grafted into the
periauricular region.
Histological analysis of the testicular fragments
The fragments were fixed directly in 4% formaldehyde, embedded in paraffin, and
then cut into serial sections of 5µm thickness for histological
evaluation. The sections were fixed in hematoxylin-eosin for optical microscope
analysis (Poels ).Ten fragments from seminiferous tubules from each sample from the three groups
were analyzed at 1000x magnification in cross sections. For each seminiferous
tubule, tubular integrity was measured using a score of 0-4.A point was given for each parameter: no basal membrane detachment, visualization
of spermatogonial nuclei, identification of germ cells and Sertoli cells, and
absence of hyalinization (Curaba ; Lima
).
Testicular Grafting
For testicular tissue grafting, the animals were anesthetized and the fragments
were grafted through an autologous transplant in the periauricular region of the
animals. An incision in the periauricular region was made with a bistoury and
the region was divulsed for the introduction of the fragment, with post
cauterization of the incision. Group 3 received the fragments right after the
orchiectomy and Groups 1 and 2 received the grafts post-vitrification and
warming, two weeks after the orchiectomy.The animals were euthanized in a CO2/O2 chamber, 60 days
after the transplant, and grafting site histology was performed.
Statistical Analysis
For viability purposes, we ran a statistical analysis of variance using ANOVA
with Tukey's comparison post-test. A p<0.05 was considered
statistically significant.
RESULTS
Cell viability after tissue cryopreservation
Figure 1 depicts cell viability of fresh
fragments and after vitrification and warming. Vitrified samples from Group 1
presented a higher recovery rate of 72.09±9.13 (p=0.02)
than those from Group 2 (59.19±10.58).
Figure 1
Cell viability recovery rate after vitrification. * Significantly
different from group 1 recovery rate
(p<0.05)
Cell viability recovery rate after vitrification. * Significantly
different from group 1 recovery rate
(p<0.05)
Testicular fragments histological analysis
Figure 2 depicts seminiferous tubules
percentage per score. Histological analysis showed similar tubular integrity
between fresh fragments from Group 3 and vitrified fragments from Group 1. Group
2 samples presented lower tubular integrity when compared to the other groups.
The most found damage was detachment from the basement membrane in all groups
(Table 1).
Figure 2
A, Ratio of seminiferous tubules per score in the three
analyzed groups. B, Comparison between histological
samples of fresh (Group 3) and vitrified (Groups 1 and 2)
seminiferous tubules
A, Ratio of seminiferous tubules per score in the three
analyzed groups. B, Comparison between histological
samples of fresh (Group 3) and vitrified (Groups 1 and 2)
seminiferous tubulesHistological damage rate found by Group.
Autologous Heterotopic Grafting
Histological analysis from grafts of three groups (n=8) was performed, one ear
per animal being evaluated. In all the groups, it was possible to observe the
implant site through surgical scars; however, no fragment of testicular tissue
or signs of inflammation were histologically observed in most samples. From the
analyzed grafts, it was possible to identify in one sample from Group 2 the
presence of degenerated seminiferous tubules with coagulation necrosis and signs
of inflammatory processes, such as macrophages. In addition, signs of
revascularization (blood capillaries) were found surrounding some of the
remaining seminiferous tubules (Figure 3).
In another sample from Group 2, intact seminiferous tubules could be found in
the implant site (Figure 4).
Figure 3
Sample graft representation 2 months after implant. A,
presence of macrophages (arrows) near degenerated seminiferous
tubules. B, presence of necrosis in degenerated tubules
(arrow). C, coagulative necrosis (arrow) and
lymphocytic interstitial infiltrate (asterisk). D,
Presence of vascularization (arrows) surrounding seminiferous tubule
(asterisk)
Figure 4
Sample graft representation showing seminiferous tubules in a Group 2
sample
Sample graft representation 2 months after implant. A,
presence of macrophages (arrows) near degenerated seminiferous
tubules. B, presence of necrosis in degenerated tubules
(arrow). C, coagulative necrosis (arrow) and
lymphocytic interstitial infiltrate (asterisk). D,
Presence of vascularization (arrows) surrounding seminiferous tubule
(asterisk)Sample graft representation showing seminiferous tubules in a Group 2
sample
DISCUSSION
Two vitrification protocols were used in the present study to evaluate their
efficiency in testicular cryopreservation. Vitrification is a fast method that has
been shown to be effective in cryopreserving ovarian tissue and appears as an
alternative to be explored since it preserves cells in the absence of ice crystals,
thus removing the deleterious effects (Pegg,
2005).Cellular viability recovery rates, verified by the Trypan blue dye exclusion test,
demonstrated the efficacy of the testicular tissue vitrification protocols tested,
and presented 72% and 59% of recovery for protocols 1 and 2, respectively. Protocol
2 presented inferior results in maintaining cell viability and this difference in
viability recovery between the two tested protocols may be explained by the
cryoprotectants concentration and the warming protocol, which were performed at
different times. Lima tested diverse cryoprotectant associations in cat prepubertal
testicular tissue. Vitrification and DMSO/EG (20% and 24%) combination obtained the
lowest quantification of nucleolar organizer regions of spermatogonia compared to
other associations. The concentration of DMSO/EG association used by Lima was similar
to that of protocol 2 (20% DMSO, 20% EG), where lower viability results were also
found.The achievement of lower viability results using high cryoprotectant concentrations,
such as DMSO may have been caused by toxic effects that the substance can induce,
since it has been reported that DMSO may be capable of causing protein denaturation
and cell membrane phospholipid bilayers destabilization (Arakawa ). However, EG is not
related to toxic effects and can be well tolerated even in high concentrations
(Unni ).In a study about cryoprotectant toxicity, Unni
found that immature testicular tissue
is twice as susceptible to damage, since adult tissue and cryoprotectants have shown
a capacity to protect different cells from male germline. For instance, EG was shown
to be the best of tested cryoprotectants to protect spermatocytes from damage, while
DMSO showed greater ability to protect spermatogonia. DMSO has been reported in
previous studies as the best isolated cryoprotectant for cryopreservation of
immature murine testicular tissue in comparison with EG and Propanediol (Goossens ; Milazzo ), but
viability rates were comparable with a DMSO/EG association.Cryoprotectants efficacy in preserving certain cell types makes the search for
associations of these substances a strategy to try to reduce the cryoprotectant's
deleterious effects. The present study used a combination of DMSO and EG in both
vitrification protocols with varying concentrations, finding that lower
concentrations of cryoprotectants (15% of DMSO, 15% of EG) were more efficient in
preserving cell viability. This result obtained on cell viability corroborates with
the best protocol tested by Gurina - slow cryopreservation of testicular tissue from
adult Wistar rats using DMSO as cryoprotectant at a rate of 67.7% viability.
Likewise, the results obtained were similar to those from Wu , who obtained 74% viability
with slow cryopreservation of immature murine testicular tissue, using DMSO as the
only cryoprotectant.Gouk also
reported similar results, with murine immature testicular tissue vitrification,
obtaining a cellular viability of 83%, found through flow cytometry and the use of
cell markers to determine viable cells. The study conducted by the cited author
showed remarkable differences in their protocol, since EG was used alone as a
cryoprotectant and the samples were exposed to four increasing concentrations during
vitrification. The samples were vitrified with the albuginea tunica being minimally
penetrated by needles, whereas in this study the tunica was completely removed from
the samples.The carrier system may influence the viability rates and the support used in our
vitrification protocols (1µL inoculation loop) diverged from several previous
studies that used the straw-in-straw method (Gouk
), aluminum foil floater (Baert ) and open
cryostraws (Curaba ). It should be noted that the use of different cryoprotectants,
maturity and tissue species, may interfere with cell viability rates after
cryopreservation, since cryoprotectants have the ability to protect different cells
of the male germ line, thus indicating that tissue maturity may be a determining
factor for the choice of cryoprotectant used (Unni
).The cell viability found in this study was lower than the numbers found by Yamini , who
presented a cell survival rate of 92% in an immature murine testicular parenchyma
submitted to the vitrification protocol. Despite similarities in vitrification
techniques that used the same cryoprotectants and the same method for cell viability
assessment, some differences between the studies, such as fragment sizes, carrier
system, and animal's species can be pointed out as the probable cause of different
results concerning cell viability recovery.It is agreed that the success of vitrification depends on factors such as sample
size, carrier systems, concentration and time of exposure to the cryoprotectant
(Liebermann ). Among the variables, the size of testicular parenchyma fragments may
have been one of the factors that contributed to the better results achieved by
Yamini ,
since fragments of 0.5-1mm were used in comparison with those of this study, which
were larger (3mm). It is known that the smaller the fragment size, the greater the
chance of this being surrounded by liquid and not the nitrogen vapor, thus
increasing cooling rates (Liebermann ), favoring cryopreservation success.Animal species should also be considered, since as demonstrated by Unni , testicular
viability rates after cryopreservation may vary in samples from different species,
even when using the same cryoprotectant solutions and protocols. The support method
to vitrify the fragment may also interfere with the results, as they seek to
increase cooling rates (Liebermann ). Inoculation loops were used as support for
testicular fragments in this study, while Yamini
used metal grids, which possibly
provided a higher cooling rate to the tissue.The histological analysis of the testicular fragments showed that Group 1 and Group 3
(fresh) tubules presented similar and equivalent tubular integrity, indicating
little structural damage to the tissue when cryoprotectants in a lower concentration
were used. This data corroborates those from Curaba
, who observed structural similarities
between fresh and vitrified tissue, also noticing that the greatest damage was the
separation of the basement membrane. Group 2 presented tubules with higher
structural damage when compared to other groups, in agreement with Lima , who found
greater similar structural damage in samples exposed to comparable concentrations of
DMSO/EG. Travers used slow cryopreservation with propanediol for rat immature
testicular tissue and found higher damage caused by epithelium gaps formation in its
histological evaluation, besides those regarding the membrane detachment.Immature murine testicular tissue vitrification protocols used by Hajiaghalou
differed from those applied in this study, because the samples were gradually
exposed to combined (DMSO/EG) or isolated (EG) cryoprotectant concentrations. In
their histological evaluation, they was also found basement membrane detachment as
main damage, similarly to those of Groups 1 and 2. Protocol 1 obtained a good
viability recovery rate, comparable to studies that used DMSO and EG as isolated
cryoprotectants in both vitrification and slow cryopreservation protocols,
preserving seminiferous tubules structure and demonstrating the possibility of using
vitrification in testicular tissue cryopreservation.Heterotopic transplantation showed signs of testicular structure disintegration and
extensive seminiferous tubules degeneration, except for one sample where it was
possible to identify intact seminiferous tubules. Obtained data corroborates with
Makala
results, showing that when autologously transplanting testicular fragments (5mm) on
the back of adult mice, there was an extensive seminiferous tubule degeneration 4
weeks after grafting and no intact seminiferous tubule present after 8 weeks.When transplanting murine testicular tissue into the dorsum of nude castrated mice,
Lim showed
an increase of sclerotic seminiferous tubules in the graft over time. Current data
and previous studies (Lim ; Makala ) showed testicular tissue degeneration after heterotopic grafting.
The absence of scrotal environment may have been one of the contributing factors for
the testicular tissue degeneration, although the microenvironment and testicular
niche were intact since fragments and non-cell suspensions were transplanted.
Possible exposure to hyperthermic conditions at the implant site may also have
contributed to fragment degeneration (Makala
).Luetjens
reported graft loss, after performing autologous transplant of testicular fragments
of marmosets to ectopic sites using slow cryopreservation as the freezing technique;
and they found the disappearance of transplanted tissue after 10 months. Even with
visible implant site, no tissue or inflammation sign was found, as it happened to
most of the current study grafts. In disagreement with Luetjens , fragment loss did not
occur only to cryopreserved fragments, but also in freshly grafted fragments.Fragment disappearance in our study may not be related to vitrification protocols,
since no differences were seen between the groups with cryopreserved or fresh
tissue. Factors that could contribute to graft disappearance are inflammatory
response causing rejection and cell death, caused by ischemia (Jahnukainen ).Other attempts of testicular tissue ectopic grafting (Arregui ; Makala ) have demonstrated Sertoli cells
survival despite seminiferous tubules extensive degeneration and sclerosis. Makala also
demonstrated Leydig cells degeneration after heterotopic transplantation, due to
cellular hypoxia during the ischemic period, which is always present in the first
moments after grafting. In our study, it was not possible to identify Leydig and
Sertoli cells, hypothesizing that tubule hypoxia and sclerosis signs due to ischemia
- that was evidenced in one of the grafts - may have occurred in all samples, making
it impossible for somatic cells to remain in the implant sites. Dias showed a
rapid macrophage recruitment derived from peritubular monocyte differentiation when
transplanting spermatogonia; and Jahnukainen
reported the presence of macrophages
when transplanting testicular tissue from Rhesus monkeys to the back of nude mice.
Interstitial infiltration of macrophages at the graft site was also demonstrated in
our study, and macrophages may have been derived from peritubular monocytes or from
blood recruitment, as it was possible to notice the presence of blood vessels
surrounding grafted seminiferous tubules.Testicular grafts that resulted in complete spermatogenesis were reported in
orthotopic fresh testicular parenchyma transplants (Luetjens and in cryopreserved and
vitrified murine tissue (Baert ). Kaneko heterotopically grafted vitrified testicular
tissue from pigs into nude mice and obtained spermatids, used to perform
Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI), resulting in birth. However, literature
data have shown negative results, as well as the present study, when autologous and
heterotopic testicular tissue fragments were transplanted (Luetjens , Makala ).Disparities in results when grafting testicular parenchyma shows that the
implantation site is a determining factor since heterotopic transplantation does not
enable efficient tissue revascularization. Orthotopic transplantation, in turn,
provides high vascularization potential (Van Saen
; Jahnukainen ), and should be considered as
an alternative because it presents an ideal temperature, lower than that of the
body, to support meiotic maturation and spermatogenesis (Luetjens ).Other implant sites, such as murine back musculature and kidney capsule, were able to
reduce post-transplant graft hypoxia; but not in ovarian tissue (Soleimani ),
perhaps because of its high vascularization. However, testicular tissue has
particularities that should be considered when choosing the graft site, in order to
preserve the necessary environment conditions that enable spermatogenesis to
occur.
CONCLUSION
The present study demonstrated the efficacy of a vitrification protocol (DMSO 15%, EG
15%) in cryopreserving pre-pubertal testicular tissue of Wistar rats through a
faster and more convenient method than slow cryopreservation. Cell viability and
histological analysis of fragments showed little damage to vitrified tissue when
cryoprotectants were used in a lower concentration.Heterotopic transplantation could not preserve the structural organization of the
testicular tissue, due to possible appearance of ischemia, degeneration processes
and immunological responses, which should promote further research on a protective
measure for the grafted tissue, such as biocompatible devices.
Authors: R R Santos; T Tharasanit; T Van Haeften; J R Figueiredo; J R V Silva; R Van den Hurk Journal: Cell Tissue Res Date: 2006-08-26 Impact factor: 5.249