Liquid nitrogen vapor is comparable to liquid nitrogen for storage of cryopreserved human sperm: evidence from the characteristics of post-thaw human sperm

A comprehensive review and update on human fertility cryopreservation methods and tools

The broad conceptualization of fertility preservation and restoration has become already a major concern in the modern western world since a large number of individuals often face it in the everyday life. Driven by different health conditions and/or social reasons, a variety of patients currently rely on routinely and non-routinely applied assisted reproductive technologies, and mostly on the possibility to cryopreserve gametes and/or gonadal tissues for expanding their reproductive lifespan. This review embraces the data present in human-focused literature regarding the up-to-date methodologies and tools contemporarily applied in IVF laboratories' clinical setting of the oocyte, sperm, and embryo cryopreservation and explores the latest news and issues related to the optimization of methods used in ovarian and testicular tissue cryopreservation.

Sperm cryostorage in a dry tank: An accurate alternative

This prospective study aimed to determine the effects of dry nitrogen cryostorage on human sperm characteristics in comparison with liquid nitrogen cryostorage. For this purpose, 42 men undergoing routine semen analysis (21 normozoospermia and 21 with altered semen parameters) were analyzed. After slow freezing, half of the straws of each sample were randomly stored in liquid and dry tanks, at the top and bottom levels of the latter. After 6 months storage, thawed samples were treated by density gradient centrifugation and sperm characteristics were compared. There was no difference in sperm progressive motility (15.1% ± 14.2% vs. 15.1% ± 12.7%; p = 0.76), sperm vitality (25.5% ± 17.7% vs. 26.2% ± 19%; p = 0.71), percentages of acrosome-reacted spermatozoa (38% ± 8.5% vs. 38.5% ± 7.4%; p = 0.53) and DNA fragmentation spermatozoa (27.3% ± 12.4% vs. 28.5% ± 12.9%, p = 0.47) after cryostorage in the dry or the liquid nitrogen tank. Moreover, we did not observe differences between either cryostorage system for normal and altered sperm samples. This lack of difference was also observed whatever the floor level of cryostorage in the dry tank. The temperature measurement of the dry tank showed a stable temperature at -194 °C throughout storage whatever the storage floor level, guaranteeing the stability of the low temperatures suitable for human sperm storage. Because of its greater safety, dry storage without contact with the liquid phase should be preferred and can be a useful alternative for the cryostorage of human sperm samples.

Human sperm vitrification: the state of the art

Sperm cryopreservation has been widely used in assisted reproductive technology (ART) and has resulted in millions of live births. Two principal approaches have been adopted: conventional (slow) freezing and vitrification. As a traditional technique, slow freezing has been successfully employed and widely used at ART clinics whereas the latter, a process to solidify liquid into an amorphous or glassy state, may become a faster alternative method of sperm cryopreservation with significant benefits in regard to simple equipment and applicability to fertility centers. Sperm vitrification has its own limitations. Firstly, small volume of load is usually plunged to liquid nitrogen to achieve high cooling rate, which makes large volume sample cryopreservation less feasible. Secondly, direct contact with liquid nitrogen increases the potential risk of contamination. Recently, new carriers have been developed to facilitate improved control over the volume and speed, and new strategies have been implemented to minimize the contamination risk. In summary, although sperm vitrification has not yet been applied in routine sperm cryopreservation, its potential as a standard procedure is growing.

Process and Pitfalls of Sperm Cryopreservation

Sperm cryopreservation has been utilized routinely for over 40 years to preserve fertility in men undergoing cancer therapy and allow conception for infertile couples. This article provides a concise and up-to-date review of the literature and covers the latest advances in sperm cryopreservation and its array of clinical indications. Over recent years, the scope of clinical indications used for sperm cryopreservation has expanded widely. Consequently, more patient groups are eligible for sperm freezing, requiring specialist resources and higher running costs. Although sperm cryopreservation prior to cancer therapy is readily available in many countries, referral rates by oncology specialists and levels of patient engagement with cryopreservation services are both reported as low. Furthermore, sperm banking continues to raise ethical issues such whether sperm donation should be anonymous and whether sperm can be utilized posthumously by the surviving partner without consent from the patient. This review focuses on the technological advances and ethical controversies in sperm cryopreservation, and how better understanding of these issues could lead to improved access to fertility preserving treatment for patients.

Cryopreservation of cynomolgus macaque (Macaca fascicularis) sperm with glycerol and ethylene glycol, and its effect on sperm-specific ion channels - CatSper and Hv1

The cryoprotective agent (CPA) is one of the most important factors that affects the cryosurvival of sperm. The aim of the present study was to compare two different CPAs, glycerol (Gly) and ethylene glycol (EG), on the cryopreservation of cynomolgus macaques sperm and evaluate the effects of cryopreservation on sperm motility, acrosomal integrity, DNA integrity, mitochondrial function and the sperm membrane ion channels CatSper and Hv1. Compared to fresh sperm, cryopreservation with either 0.7 M Gly or EG decreased the sperm motility (79.8 ± 1.5% Vs. 47.3 ± 1.8% and 47.6 ± 1.4%), acrosomal integrity (89.6 ± 1.2% Vs. 80.1 ± 1.8% and 79.6 ± 1.7%), DNA integrity (91.9 ± 0.7% Vs. 82.9 ± 1.0% and 82.3 ± 1.0%) and mitochondrial membrane potential (87.9 ± 1.8% Vs. 70.6 ± 2.7% and 67.9 ± 2.5%) and the quantity of the CatSper and Hv1 channels determined by Western Blot (p < 0.05), and EG showed equal cryoprotection to cynomolgus sperm in all of the sperm parameters. Our results indicated, for the first time, that cryopreservation decreases the quantity of sperm membrane ion channels (CatSper and Hv1), which might be one of the reasons that frozen sperm have a low fertilizing ability. The study will be beneficial to understand the biological process involved in sperm cryopreservation of nonhuman primates and contribute to improving cryopreservation protocols than can maintain sperm function and fertilizing ability.