Review On Vitrification and Conventional Freezing Method in Sperm Collection, Freezing and Cryopreservation

The storage of sample sperm through freezing serves as a starting method for both animal breeding and reproductive medicine since it creates access to preserved specimens at any time. This review compares two primary sperm cryopreservation methods: conventional freezing and vitrification. The freezing technique together with its slow programmable freezing (SPF) variant preserves sperm quality by permitting cells to decrease internal ice crystals through extended temperature adjustments taking 2–4 hours despite possible cellular damage. Sperm cells retain top quality when vitrification works due to its fast-freezing method that stops ice crystals from developing. High success rates during post-thaw tests and DNA protection along with reduced oxidative damage are achieved through vitrification by maintaining exact control over cryoprotectant use and cooling speed regulations yet technical requirements and elevated costs emerge as major obstacles. The ART clinics use conventional freezing for storage because it remains the cost-efficient option that allows easy specimen access yet it causes motility reduction in comparison with vitrification. The combination of standard freezing techniques with vitrification has become essential because existing protocols work well in freezing but vitrification leads to superior ART outcomes. The development of both vitrification method protocols and cryoprotectant-free freezing techniques along with genetic modification methods is necessary to boost sperm storage capabilities.