Andrea S K Jones1, Ariella Shikanov1,2,3. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States. 3. Program in Cellular and Molecular Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Breast cancer patients who cannot delay treatment or for whom hormone stimulation and egg retrieval are contraindicated require alternative methods of fertility preservation prior to gonadotoxic treatment. Ovarian tissue cryopreservation is an alternative approach that may offer patients the opportunity to preserve fertility and carry biologically-related children later in life. Various experimental approaches are being explored to obtain mature gametes from cryopreserved and thawed ovarian tissue for fertilization and implantation using biomimetic tissue culture in vitro. Here we review the most recent developments in ovarian tissue cryopreservation and exciting advances in bioengineering approaches to in vitro tissue and ovarian follicle culture. RECENT FINDINGS: Slow freezing is the most widely accepted method for ovarian tissue cryopreservation, but efforts have been made to modify vitrification for this application as well. Numerous approaches to in vitro tissue and follicle culture are in development, most prominently two-step culture systems for ovarian cortical tissue and encapsulation of ovarian follicles in biomimetic matrices for in vitro culture. SUMMARY: Refinements to slow freeze and vitrification protocols continue to address challenges associated with cryopreservation, such as ice crystal formation and damage to the stroma. Similarly, improvements to in vitro tissue and follicle culture show promise for utilizing patients' cryopreserved tissues to obtain mature gametes after disease treatment and remission. Development of an effective and reproducible culture system for human ovarian follicles will serve as a broad assisted reproductive technology for cancer survivors who cryopreserved tissue prior to treatment.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Breast cancer patients who cannot delay treatment or for whom hormone stimulation and egg retrieval are contraindicated require alternative methods of fertility preservation prior to gonadotoxic treatment. Ovarian tissue cryopreservation is an alternative approach that may offer patients the opportunity to preserve fertility and carry biologically-related children later in life. Various experimental approaches are being explored to obtain mature gametes from cryopreserved and thawed ovarian tissue for fertilization and implantation using biomimetic tissue culture in vitro. Here we review the most recent developments in ovarian tissue cryopreservation and exciting advances in bioengineering approaches to in vitro tissue and ovarian follicle culture. RECENT FINDINGS: Slow freezing is the most widely accepted method for ovarian tissue cryopreservation, but efforts have been made to modify vitrification for this application as well. Numerous approaches to in vitro tissue and follicle culture are in development, most prominently two-step culture systems for ovarian cortical tissue and encapsulation of ovarian follicles in biomimetic matrices for in vitro culture. SUMMARY: Refinements to slow freeze and vitrification protocols continue to address challenges associated with cryopreservation, such as ice crystal formation and damage to the stroma. Similarly, improvements to in vitro tissue and follicle culture show promise for utilizing patients' cryopreserved tissues to obtain mature gametes after disease treatment and remission. Development of an effective and reproducible culture system for human ovarian follicles will serve as a broad assisted reproductive technology for cancer survivors who cryopreserved tissue prior to treatment.
Authors: Gary D Smith; Paulo C Serafini; Joyce Fioravanti; Isaac Yadid; Marcio Coslovsky; Pericles Hassun; José Roberto Alegretti; Eduardo L Motta Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2010-02-19 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Stine A Lunding; Anders N Andersen; Lilja Hardardottir; Hanna Ø Olesen; Stine G Kristensen; Claus Y Andersen; Susanne E Pors Journal: Mol Reprod Dev Date: 2020-06-07 Impact factor: 2.609
Authors: Min Xu; Susan L Barrett; Erin West-Farrell; Laxmi A Kondapalli; Sarah E Kiesewetter; Lonnie D Shea; Teresa K Woodruff Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2009-07-13 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Christiani A Amorim; Anne Van Langendonckt; Anu David; Marie-Madeleine Dolmans; Jacques Donnez Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2008-09-23 Impact factor: 6.918