Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
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 (5)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mahadevan, M. M.
Right arrow Articles by Moutos, D. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mahadevan, M. M.
Right arrow Articles by Moutos, D. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol 13, 979-982, Copyright © 1998 by Oxford University Press

ARTICLES

Formaldehyde in cryoprotectant propanediol and effect on mouse zygotes

MM Mahadevan, Q McIntosh, MM Miller, SM Breckinridge, M Maris and DM Moutos
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Little Rock, USA.

Cryopreservation of human zygotes and embryos has been routinely performed by in-vitro fertilization clinics for many years. Karran and Legge (1996) first reported that formaldehyde (FA) present in the cryoprotective solutions can have a deleterious effect on mouse oocytes. FA is a cytotoxic, carcinogenic and mutagenic chemical. The effect of FA on mouse zygotes was investigated. In addition, the concentrations of FA in propanediol (PROH) obtained from various sources were determined. Pooled 1-cell embryos were dispensed into droplets of modified Ham's F10 or human tubal fluid containing various concentrations of FA. Since bovine serum albumin (BSA) may minimize toxicity additional trials were done as above in the absence of BSA. FA concentration in the standard 1.5 M PROH, from different sources in water, was measured in the same assay using a standard curve of 0-100 microM FA. FA in a complex medium had a significant deleterious effect on embryo development and hatching but only at 1 mM concentration (P < 0.000001; see Tables I-III). There was no significant effect of FA at 100 microM. However, in a simple medium even 50 microM FA decreased embryo hatching. FA was present in 1.5 M PROH from different sources (range 1.0-35.3 microM concentration). It appears that FA concentrations do not increase with storage because FA concentrations were low even after opening and storage for 3 years on the shelf. This suggests that FA is a contaminant during the manufacturing process and may vary from manufacturer to manufacturer and batch to batch. Until further studies are done to confirm the lack of toxicity to embryos during cryopreservation (with or without FA scavengers) it may be prudent to screen all batches of cryoprotectants for FA as part of quality control.
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 ReprodHome page
E. Dulioust, M.-C. Busnel, M. Carlier, P. Roubertoux, and M. Auroux
Embryo cryopreservation and development: facts, questions and responsibility
Hum. Reprod., May 1, 1999; 14(5): 1141 - 1145.
[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.