. 2015 Sep 27;61(6):571–579. doi: 10.1262/jrd.2015-089

Table 5. In vitro embryo development after IVF of oocytes vitrified in different combinations of penetrating CPA.

Treatment groups	Cultured^*	Cleaved embryos (% cultured)	Blastocysts (day 6)		Total cells in blastocysts
Treatment groups	Cultured^*	Cleaved embryos (% cultured)	(% cultured)	(% cleaved)	Total cells in blastocysts
Control	295	191	72		46.6 ± 2.3
Control	295	(64.7 ± 2.4)^a	(24.4 ± 3.0)^a	(37.4 ± 3.2)^a	46.6 ± 2.3
Vitrified-EG + PG	234	73	10		48.1 ± 5.3
Vitrified-EG + PG	234	(30.5 ± 6.5)^b	(4.1 ± 2.3)^b	(11.7 ± 4.2)^b	48.1 ± 5.3
Vitrified-EG + DMSO	138	62	9		31.2 ± 6.3^$
Vitrified-EG + DMSO	138	(44.5 ± 7.9)^b	(6.3 ± 2.0)^b	(13.2 ± 2.1)^b	31.2 ± 6.3^$
Vitrified-EG + PG + DMSO	252	88	12		45.2 ± 5.8
Vitrified-EG + PG + DMSO	252	(34.5 ± 4.1)^b	(4.8 ± 0.7)^b	(14.6 ± 2.7)^b	45.2 ± 5.8

Four replications were performed. Data are presented as mean ± SEM values. * After vitrification, IVM and IVF, only surviving oocytes were subjected to subsequent culture. ^{a, b, c} Percentages with different letters in the same column differ significantly (P < 0.05). ^$ Tendentious difference compared with the other groups (P = 0.06–0.08).