Skip Navigation


Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on March 10, 2005
Human Reproduction 2005 20(6):1607-1614; doi:10.1093/humrep/deh787
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/6/1607    most recent
deh787v1
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Navarro-Costa, P.
Right arrow Articles by Plancha, C.E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Navarro-Costa, P.
Right arrow Articles by Plancha, C.E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions{at}oupjournals.org

Effects of mouse ovarian tissue cryopreservation on granulosa cell–oocyte interaction

P. Navarro-Costa1, S.C. Correia2, A. Gouveia-Oliveira3, F. Negreiro3, S. Jorge2, A.J. Cidadão1, M.J. Carvalho2 and C.E. Plancha1,4

1 Biology of Reproduction Unit, Institute of Molecular Medicine, Lisbon Medical School, 1649-028 Lisboa, 2 Medicine of Reproduction Unit, Gynaecology Service, Maternidade Dr. Alfredo da Costa, 1069–089 Lisboa and 3 Datamedica Lda., Rua Rosa Araújo, 34, 5°, 1250–195 Lisboa, Portugal

4 To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: carlos.plancha{at}mail.telepac.pt

BACKGROUND: Current ovarian tissue cryopreservation protocols have yet to be assessed in terms of somatic–germ cell interaction. Accordingly, post-thaw analysis of antral follicles can yield relevant data on the disruption of the granulosa–oocyte interface. METHODS: We compared fresh mouse ovarian tissue with tissues that had been either cryopreserved using dimethylsulphoxide (DMSO) or glycerol as cryoprotectants, or exposed to such cryoprotectants without freezing. The assessed parameters were: number of immature oocytes retrieved per ovary, allocation of the oocytes to different classes regarding antral follicle size and oocyte–granulosa cell adhesion, and the relative density of transzonal processes containing filamentous actin (TZPs-Act). RESULTS: Although cryopreservation reduces the average number of oocytes retrieved per ovary, it increases the relative distribution of granulosa-free oocytes while decreasing that of granulosa-enclosed ones. Additionally, a post-thaw decrease in TZPs-Act density was recorded. This decrease was also observed after cryoprotectant exposure without freezing, although at a lower level. For the assessed parameters, DMSO was more effective than glycerol as a cryoprotectant. CONCLUSIONS: In situ cryopreservation of granulosa–oocyte complexes with current protocols disrupts the granulosa–oocyte interface. The different patterns of granulosa cell adhesion and interaction in oocytes derived from different-sized antral follicles further suggests that the granulosa–oocyte interface may be developmentally regulated.

Key words: actin/granulosa–oocyte communication/ovarian tissue cryopreservation/transzonal processes


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
I. Demeestere, P. Simon, S. Emiliani, A. Delbaere, and Y. Englert
Orthotopic and heterotopic ovarian tissue transplantation
Hum. Reprod. Update, November 1, 2009; 15(6): 649 - 665.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.