Effect of warming method on embryo quality in a simplified equine embryo vitrification system.

Abstract: Equine embryo vitrification is still not a well-established technique in equine practice. Notably, little work has been done on the effect of the warming system on viability of vitrified embryos. Our goal was to evaluate the effect of warming without cryoprotectants on in vitro - produced (IVP) embryo viability in culture, quality assessment parameters, and pregnancy after transfer. Equine IVP blastocysts were vitrified using commercial embryo vitrification media and a semi-closed vitrification device. In Exp. 1, we evaluated two warming temperatures (room temperature, RT, ∼22 °C; and 38 °C) for each of three warming systems: commercial warming solution (Kit); commercial embryo holding medium (EHM) with decreasing concentrations of sucrose (EHM + SS); or EHM alone without added sucrose. Embryos (n = 9 to 14 per treatment) were cultured in vitro for 24 h, stained with DAPI, TUNEL, and fluorophore-labelled phalloidin, and evaluated for nucleus number, mitotic rate, apoptotic rate, and actin filament distribution. In Exp. 2, to survey embryo viability in vivo, vitrified IVP blastocysts were shipped to an embryo transfer facility, then warmed immediately before transfer to recipient mares, using the warming treatments associated with the nominally best (Kit-RT, Kit-38, EHM-RT) and poorest (EHM + SS-38) assessed embryo quality in Exp. 1 (n = 7 to 8 per treatment). Subsequently, IVP blastocysts produced as part of our clinical program were vitrified and shipped, then warmed in embryo holding medium at an embryo transfer facility before transfer to recipient mares; fresh IVP embryos were shipped and transferred as controls. In Exp. 1, embryos increased significantly in diameter after culture (P  0.05) in the number of viable nuclei, apoptotic rate, or microfilament distribution among treatments, or between vitrified-warmed and Control embryos. The mitotic rate was higher (P = 0.021) for Kit-RT (3.6%) when compared with the other treatment groups (1.5-2.0%). In Exp. 2, there was no difference (P > 0.05) in initial pregnancy (71.4-87.5%) or heartbeat (57.1%-85.7%) rates among warming treatments. In the clinical trial, there was no difference (P > 0.05) between vitrified-warmed and Control embryos in initial pregnancy (90.9% and 66.6%, respectively) or heartbeat (81.8% and 66.6%, respectively) rates. These results indicate that a semi-closed vitrification system using commercially-available media, and incorporating warming in the field in a single step using commercial embryo holding medium without cryoprotectants, can provide high pregnancy rates with IVP equine embryos.