Bhukya et al. World Journal of Pharmaceutical and Life Sciences
HYPERREACTIO LEUTINALIS AND MOLAR PREGNENCY
Dr. Bhukya Sukanya Bai*, Dr. Mandava Mahima Swaroopa, Musini Vani and Deekonda Mounika
Asst. Professors, Anurag College of Pharmacy, Kodad.
Article Received on 23/03/2017 Article Revised on 15/04/2017 Article Accepted on 05/05/2017
INTRODUCTION
Hyperreactio luteinalis (HL) alludes to direct to checked cystic extension of the ovaries because of numerous generous theca lutein blister. The reason for this condition is obscure, yet is accepted to be identified with lifted levels of, or anomalous ovarian reaction to, human
chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and pituitary
gonadotropins. The ovaries in HL are symmetrical with uniform measured theca lutein sores.[1] HL is a considerate condition that happens in half of patients with gestational trophoblastic neoplasia.[2] Up to 25% of instances of molar pregnancy and 10% of instances of choriocarcinoma might be related with these sores.[3] Theca lutein blister are related with finish hydatidiform moles 14% to 30% of the time. These growths are ordinarily not found in the principal trimester of molar pregnancies in light of moderately low Beta-hCG values around then. Incomplete molar pregnancy is not prone to have theca lutein blisters.
A molar pregnancy is a gestational trophoblastic infection. which develops into a mass in the uterus that has swollen chorionic villi.These villi develop in groups that look like grapes. A molar pregnancy can create when a treated egg does not contain a unique maternal core. The results of origination could possibly contain fetal tissue. It is portrayed by the nearness of a hydatidiform mole (or hydatid mole, mola hydatidosa.[4] Molar pregnancies are classified as fractional moles or finish moles, with the word mole being utilized to
indicate just a cluster of developing tissue, or a development. A total mole is brought on by a solitary (rate is around 90%) or two (occurrence is around 10%) sperm joining with an egg which has lost its DNA (the sperm then reduplicates shaping a "total" 46 chromosome set). The genotype is ordinarily 46, XX (diploid) because of ensuing mitosis of the treating sperm, however can likewise be 46, XY (diploid). 46, YY (diploid) is not watched. Conversely, an incomplete mole happens when a haploid egg is prepared by two sperm or by one sperm which reduplicates itself yielding the genotypes of 69, XXY(triploid) or 92,XXXY (tetraploid).[5] Arrangement of mole happens with a related of over abundance of avuncular contrasted and maternal haploid commitment The higher proportion of avuncular to maternal chromosome the more noteworthy for the molar changes Finish mole demonstrates a 2:0 proportion of fatherly to maternal chromosome,where as halfway mole demonstrates a 2:1 proportion. The issue of The moles were first depicted by Hippocrates (470– 410 BC) who clarified their arrangement through the utilization of filthy water by the pregnant ladies, where the water begins from the swamps. In any case, the terms mole and hydatidiform later utilized by William Smelie (1752). This creator portrays this pathology as a bundle of grapes comprising of different sizes.[6,7]
The moles display diffuse trophoblastic hyperplasia where the structures of villosities are of especially variant and hydropic (Fig. 1). Such disorder vascular development in the moles could be because of the
World Journal of Pharmaceutical and Life Sciences
WJPLSwww.wjpls.org SJIF Impact Factor: 4.223
*Corresponding Author: Dr. Bhukya Sukanya Bai
Asst. Professors, Anurag College of Pharmacy, Kodad.
ABSTRACT
Hyperreactio luteinalis (HL) alludes to direct to checked cystic extension of the ovaries because of numerous generous theca lutein blister. HL is a considerate condition that happens in half of patients with,.Up to 25% of instances of molar pregnancy and 10% of instances of choriocarcinoma might be related with these sores Ectopic pregnancies, miscarriages and hydatidiform moles are the most widely recognized sorts of pathological pregnancies in the early phase of pregnancy and are a critical general medical issue. Molar pregnancy pathology as a bundle of grapes comprising of various sizes. Prophylactic organization of either Methotrexate or Actinomycin D chemotherapy at the season of or quickly after clearing of a hydatidiform mole is related with a diminishment in occurrence of postmolar GTN.
KEYWORDS: Hyperreactio luteinalis, Ectopic pregnancies, hydatidiform moles, Molar pregnancy, gestational
expanded level of apoptosis in the forerunner segments of the veins or to the damaged enlistment of pericytes around the villous stromal vessels.[8]
Hydatidiform mole (HM) is a premalignant type of gestational trophoblastic ailment that happens from uncalled for fetal and placental improvement.[9,10]
Prevalence and Associated Risk Factors of HM Among Patients with Incomplete Abortion Evacuated
Low outrageous of maternal age was firmly connected with predominance of HM (p= 0.01). This was reliable with discoveries seen in different reviews[11,12,13] 35% patients had history of past fetus removal among who (14.3%) had HM, while 65% had no earlier premature birth however among them 12% had HM. which demonstrated that the danger of HM increments with history of past fetus removal. Most of the members with HM were primiparous (15.8%). Besides, PHM (12.9%) was more typical than CHM (3%). The danger of HM was found to diminish with an expansion in the quantity of births, yet this was not factually critical. Comparable outcome were accounted for in Italy by Parazzini et al however the pattern in hazard was huge just in PHM.[14]
Diagnosis of Hydatidiform Moles
At present, single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)- based microarray examination permits the discovery of duplicate number varieties (CNVs), and in addition genotype data, at different polymorphic loci all through the genome.[15,16] In spite of the fact that the clinical utility of CNV location is entrenched, data gotten from SNP-based microarray investigation has just been used in an established cytogenetics research center setting until analogously.[17] Different procedures have been produced for the analysis of HMs; in any case, they all have certain impediments, which prompt a lessening in their precision. Neurotic examination of the placental tissue is
fundamental in the assessment of miscarriage
specimen.[18] In spite of the fact that the execution
attributes of SNP-cluster genotyping are better than different strategies for diagnosing HM, a few confinements must be noted. SNP-exhibit genotyping can recognize triploidy, however not all instances of triploidy result in the phenotype of PHM[19] it is imperative to join SNP-exhibit genotyping with clinical discoveries, histopathological highlights and genotyping results to guarantee a precise grouping, for instance, histology and p57 immunohistochemistry taken after by microsatellite genotyping for obscure cases.[20,21,22] In spite of the previously mentioned restrictions to the clinical affectability and specificity, SNP-cluster genotyping is significant since it yields coordinate data about the system, even without the discovery of the father's and mother's samples. The technique is generally cheap, and empowers the recognizable proof of other genomic variations from the norm that could conceivably
be misclassified as HMs on histopathological
examination. At last, and in particular, in barring an analysis of either CHM or PHM, SNP-exhibit genotyping dispenses with the prerequisite for clinical checking taking after pregnancy termination.[23]
Data given by molecular karyotyping is specifically connected with the physical and hereditary guide of the human genome. Notwithstanding particular genotype information, investigation of SNP allele examples can give: i) Confirmation of CNV calls; ii) affectability for recognition of mosaicism; and iii) location of unreasonable homozygosity For this reason, SNP exhibits are all the more profoundly delicate for the identification of HM.[24]
Pathological Pregnancies
Ectopic pregnancies, miscarriages and hydatidiform moles are the most widely recognized sorts of pathological pregnancies in the early phase of pregnancy and are a critical general medical issue. Most instances of these pathological pregnancies happen in the primary trimester and have some comparable clinical side effects and uncertainty factors.[25] An ectopic pregnancy happens when a prepared egg embeds outside the endometrial cavity, conventionally in the fallopian tube and it expands the danger of future infertility. Ectopic pregnancy has been accounted for to influence 2 % of all recognized pregnancies in the United States.[26,27] Hydatidiform mole is a developing mass of tissue in uterus that won't form into an embryo and happens therefore of atypical insemination. Hydatidiform mole is most well-known obstacle of gestational trophoblastic disease (GTD), which has a danger of experiencing harmful change and growing early onset preeclampsia,
the commonest confusion of pregnancy[28] Ectopic
EPI Genetic Factors
Various risk factors for molar pregnancies have been recommended, including
Paternalage[30]
maternal hereditary anomalies[31]
blood groups[32]
oralcontraceptives[33]
maternal age[34]
ecological variables; specifically vitamin A and the folates[35]
Anatomy and Histology
Molar pregnancy pathology as a bundle of grapes comprising of various sizes.[36,37] Association of the
trophoblast, brings about the constrained
acknowledgment of the nearness of vascular
structures.[38] Differential utterance of E-cadherin, β-catenin, and Lewis x between obtrusive hydatidiform moles and post-molar choriocarcinomas. The issue of vascular development in the moles could be because of the expanded level of apoptosis in predecessor components of the blood vessels[39]or, then again to the to the defective recruitment of pericytes around the villous stromal vessels.[40] Not withstanding the nearness of these vessels, it is not sure that they contain different
haematopoietic segments. This diligent vascular
adolescence of the villous stroma could prompt hydropic villi for the most part in CHM. On account of PHM, these trophoblastic abnormalities are less present and ordinarily contain identifiable embryonic or fetal tissues, which is exceptionally rare on account of the CHM. The disorders of hydatidiform mole. II. Morphologic development of the total and halfway mole. Shockingly, this trophoblastic hyperplasia can keep on forming to such a degree whereby it attacks and therefore surpasses the uterine cavity
Differentiation
The cells of the CTB effectively multiply quickly after implantation and attack the endometrium and the winding courses in a controlled way, permitting the stopping of these vessels.On the surface of villi the CTB cells produce, by asymmetrical cell division, the multinucleated syncytiotrophoblasts This STB loses any previous mitotic action and it is extremely touchy to the nearness of oxygen. The STB secretes various hormones, for example, human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG). The CTB cell multiplication is mindful of the creation of 2 sorts of develop villi which are; coasting and tying down villi The expansion is speedier in the focal point of the placenta when contrasted with the periphery.[41] The stopping of the trophoblastic cells keeps away from the teratogenic impact of too high oxygen weight (pO2) in the developing life. Amid the 10–12 first weeks of the incubation, the STB does not discharge cancer prevention agent catalysts. On the other hand, this hypoxia bolsters placenta angiogenesis and the multiplication of the CTB cells.[42] Around 10 weeks of incubation, the trophoblastic fittings are disintegrated
and the dynamic maternal winding conduits rebuild into expansive measurement vessels (utero-placental veins), which are in charge of the expanded level of blood stream The maternal blood can now circle effectively between the villi, supply required supplements from the mother to the hatchling and wipe out the lethal components from the embryo. These changes happen in parallel to the huge development of the embryo. Amid growth, the CTB diminishes in thickness at term, the STB is in close contact with placental vessels permitting effective supplement take-up by the embryo.[43]
Regulators
The utero-placental controllers are sorted out at an early phase of pregnancy and relate to a discourse between maternal cells (decidual cells, NK cells, macrophages) and trophoblastic cells. This compelling discourse limits, in space and in time, the expansion and intrusion of extravillous CTB, separately, to 33% of the inside myometrium and until the sixteenth week of incubation.[44] The hypoxic condition of the main trimester of pregnancy advances the cell multiplication of trophoblast and stays away from oxidative anxiety, the change of the villi and represses the separation of extravillous trophoblast to the intrusive phenotype. This hypoxic condition is kept up for around 10 weeks of incubation. After this stage, the pO2 increments and the placenta phenotype winds up plainly intrusive, permitting the renovating of the winding conduits; prompting expanded blood perfusion of the placenta Any deviations in these controllers (pO2 or/and trophoblast reaction), brings about the placenta building up a proliferative phenotype; a circumstance that could be the reason for one of the histological parts of molar pregnancies. These controllers are controlled by various elements exhibit in the trophoblast, for example, hypoxia-inducible element 1α (HIF1α), and in the decidua, for example, changing development consider β (TGFβ) and Decorin. The outflow of interpretation component HIF1α is high amid the early phases of pregnancy and abatements following 9 weeks of development, when pO2 starts to increment. Under decreased pO2, the trophoblast cells enact HIF1α, which thus upregulates TGFβ expression.[45]
Treatment Options
Hysterectomy is a contrasting option to suction curettage if childbearing has been finished. Notwithstanding clearing the molar pregnancy, hysterectomy gives perpetual cleansing and disposes of the danger of neighborhood myometrial intrusion as a reason for industrious ailment. In light of the potential for metastatic sickness even after hysterectomy, the danger of postmolar GTN still stays at 3–5%, in this manner
requiring proceeded with β-HCG development[46]
prophylactic chemotherapy ought to be restricted, nonetheless, to uncommon circumstances in which the danger of postmolar GTN is substantially more noteworthy than ordinary or where sufficient HCG follow-up is unrealistic, as basically all patients who are caught up with serial HCG testing after molar clearing and found to have persevering GTN can be cured with suitable chemotherapy.[47,48]Follow-up after clearing of a hydatidiform mole is fundamental to recognize trophoblastic sequelae (obtrusive mole 452 George
Alexandru Filipescu et al. or, then again
choriocarcinoma), which create in roughly 15–20% with
completemole and 1–5% with incomplete mole.[49]
Complete follow-up requires serial serum quantitative HCG estimations like clockwork until three sequential tests demonstrate ordinary levels, after which HCG levels ought to be resolved at three months interim for six months after the unconstrained come back to typical. The greater part of patients will have finish relapse of β-HCG to ordinary inside two months after departure. Contraception is prescribed for six months after the main typical β-HCG result, to recognize a rising β-HCG in light of constant or repetitive sickness from a rising β-HCG related with a consequent pregnancy. The utilization of oral prophylactic pills is ideal since they have the upside of smothering endogenous LH, which may meddle with the estimation of β-HCG at low levels and studies have demonstrated that they don't expand the danger of postmolar trophoblastic neoplasia.[50,51]
CONCLUSION
HL) alludes to direct to marked cystic growth of the ovaries because of various kind theca lutein blisters. A molar pregnancy is a gestational trophoblastic infection. which develops into a mass in the uterus that has swollen chorionic villi The stopping of the trophoblastic cells maintains a strategic distance from the teratogenic impact of too high oxygen weight (pO2) in the incipient organism. SNP-exhibit genotyping are better than the dominant part of different strategies for diagnosing HM. Amid the 10–12 first weeks of the growth, the STB does not emit cancer prevention agent chemicals. Prophylactic organization of either Methotrexate or Actinomycin D chemotherapy at the season of or promptly after departure of a hydatidiform mole is related with a diminishment in occurrence of postmolar GTN
REFERENCES
1. Kobayashi E, Setsu N. Osteosclerosis induced by denosumab. Lancet, 2014 Oct; S0140-6736(14).
2. Schnorr JA, Jr, Miller H, Davis JR, Hatch K, Seeds
J. Hyperreactio luteinalis associated with pregnancy: a case report and review of the literature.Am J Perinatol, 1996; 13: 95-97
3. Bidus MA, Reis A, Magann EF, Matin JN.
Markedly elevated b-hCG levels in a normal
singleton gestation with hyperreactio
luteinalis. Obstet and Gynecol, 2002; 99: 958-961.
4. Gestational Trophoblastic Disease at American
Cancer Society. Last Medical Review: 04/14/2011. 5. Kumar, Vinay, ed. Pathologic Basis of Disease (8th
ed.). Saunders Elsevier, 2010; 1051058. ISBN 1-4377-0792-0
6. A Follow-up survey of the cases of hydatidiform mole and chorion-epithelioma treated at the London hospital since 1912: (Section of Obstetrics and Gynaecology). Proc R Soc Med, 1935; 28: 1213-28. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
7. Slim R, Mehio A. The genetics of hydatidiform
moles: new lights on an ancient disease. Clin Genet,
2007; 71: 25-34. PMID:17204043;
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-0004.2006.00697.x [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
8. Kim KR, Sung CO, Kwon TJ, Lee J, Robboy
SJ.. Defective pericyte recruitment of villous stromal vessels as the possible etiologic cause of hydropic change in complete hydatidiform mole. PLoS One 2015; 10: 0122266. PMID:25849742;
9. Vassilakos P., Riotton G., Kajii T. Hydatidiform mole: two entities. A morphologic and cytogenetic study with some clinical considerations. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1977; 127(2): 167–170. [PubMed]
10. Szulman A. E., Surti U. The clinicopathologic profile of the partial hydatidiform mole.Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1982; 59(5): 597–602. [PubMed]
11. Sebire NJ, Foskett M, Fisher R A, Rees H, Seckl M,
Newlands E. Risk of partial and complete hydatidiform molar pregnancy in relation to
maternal age. BJOG, 2002; 109(1): 99–
102. [PubMed]
12. Loukovaara M, Pukkala E, Lehtovirta P, Leminen A. Epidemiology of hydatidiform mole in Finland, 1975 to 2001. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol, 2005; 26(2): 207–208. [PubMed]
13. Salehi S, Eloranta S, Johansson A L, Bergström M,
Lambe M. Reporting and incidence trends of hydatidiform mole in Sweden 1973–2004. Acta Oncol, 2011; 50(3): 367–372.[PubMed]
14. Parazzini F, Mangili G, La Vecchia C A R L O, Negri E, Bocciolone L, Fasoli M. Risk factors for gestational trophoblastic disease: a separate analysis of complete and partial hydatidiform moles. Obstet Gynecol, 1991; 78(6): 1039–1045. [PubMed]
15. Wheeler E, Huang N, Bochukova EG, Keogh JM,
Lindsay S, Garg S, Henning E, Blackburn H, Loos RJ, Wareham NJ, et al. Genome-wide SNP and CNV analysis identifies common and low-frequency
variants associated with severe early-onset
obesity. Nat Genet, 2013; 45: 513–517. doi:
10.1038/ng.2607. [PMC free
article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
16. Winchester L, Ragoussis J. Algorithm
implementation for CNV discovery using
17. Kearney HM, Kearney JB, Conlin LK. Diagnostic implications of excessive homozygosity detected by SNP-based microarrays: Consanguinity, uniparental disomy and recessive single-gene mutations. Clin
Lab Med, 2011; 31: 595–613. doi:
10.1016/j.cll.2011.08.003. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
18. Grinschgl I, Mannweiler S, Holzapfel-Bauer M,
Pferschy U, Hoefler G, Guertl B. The role of morphology in combination with ploidy analysis in characterizing early gestational abortion. Virchows Arch, 2013; 462: 175–182. doi: 10.1007/s00428-012-1350-8.[PubMed] [Cross Ref]
19. Zaragoza MV, Surti U, Redline RW, Millie E,
Chakravarti A, Hassold TJ. Parental origin and phenotype of triploidy in spontaneous abortions: Predominance of diandry and association with the partial hydatidiform mole. Am J Hum Genet, 2000; 66: 1807–1820. doi: 10.1086/302951. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
20. Furtado LV, Paxton CN, Jama MA, Tripp SR,
Wilson AR, Lyon E, Jarboe EA, Thaker HM, Geiersbach KB. Diagnostic utility of microsatellite genotyping for molar pregnancy testing. Arch Pathol
Lab Med, 2013; 137: 55–63. doi:
10.5858/arpa.2012-0047-OA.[PubMed] [Cross Ref] 21. Chiang S, Fazlollahi L, Nguyen A, Betensky RA,
Roberts DJ, Iafrate AJ. Diagnosis of hydatidiform moles by polymorphic deletion probe fluorescence in situ hybridization. J Mol Diagn, 2011; 13: 406– 415. doi: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2011.02.002. [PMC free
article] [PubMed][Cross Ref]3McConnell TG,
Murphy KM, Hafez M, Vang R, Ronnett BM 22. Diagnosis and subclassification of hydatidiform
moles using p57 immunohistochemistry and molecular genotyping: Validation and prospective analysis in routine and consultation practice settings with development of an algorithmic approach. Am J
Surg Pathol, 2009; 33: 805–817. doi:
10.1097/PAS.0b013e318191f309. [PubMed] [Cross Ref].
23. Schwartz S. Clinical utility of single nucleotide polymorphism arrays. Clin Lab Med, 2011; 31: 581–
594. doi:
10.1016/j.cll.2011.09.002. [PubMed] [Cross Ref] 24. Kearney HM, Kearney JB, Conlin LK. Diagnostic
implications of excessive homozygosity detected by SNP-based microarrays: Consanguinity, uniparental disomy and recessive single-gene mutations. Clin
Lab Med, 2011; 31: 595–613. doi:
10.1016/j.cll.2011.08.003. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
25. Atrash HK, Friede A, Hogue CJ. Ectopic pregnancy
mortality in the United States, 1970–1983. Obstet Gynecol, 1987; 70(6): 817–22. [PubMed]
26. Saraiya M, Berg CJ, Shulman H, Green CA, Atrash
HK. Estimates of the annual number of clinically recognized pregnancies in the United States, 1981–
1991. AmJEpidemiol, 1999; 149(11): 1025–9.
doi10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009747. [PubMed] [ Cross Ref]
27. Chang J, Elam-Evans LD, Berg CJ, Herndon J,
Flowers L, Seed KA, et al. Pregnancy-related
mortality surveillance--United States, 1991–
1999. MMWR Surveill Summ, 2003; 52(2): 1– 8. [PubMed]
28. Berkowitz RS, GoldsteinDP.
Chorionictumors. NEnglJMed, 1996; 335(23):
1740–8. doi:
10.1056/NEJM199612053352306. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
29. Hoover KW, Tao G, Kent CK. Trends in the
diagnosis and treatment of ectopic pregnancy in the United States. Obstet Gynecol, 2010; 115(3): 495–
502. doi:
10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181d0c328. [PubMed] [Cros s Ref]
30. Messerli ML, Lilienfeld AM, Parmley T, Woodruff
JD,Rosenshein NB. Risk factors for gestational trophoblastic neoplasia. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1985;
153: 294-300. PMID:2996354;
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(85)80115-0[CrossRef], [PubMed], [Web of Science
®], [Google Scholar]
31. Lawler SD, Pickthall VJ, Fisher RA, Povey S, Evans
MW,Szulman AE. Genetic studies of complete and partial hydatidiform moles. Lancet, 1979; 2: 580.
PMID:89576;
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(79)91632-5[CrossRef], [PubMed], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar] 32. Parazzini F, La
Vecchia C, Franceschi S, Pampallona S,Decarli A, Mangili G, Belloni C. ABO blood-groups and the risk of gestational trophoblastic disease. Tumori, 1985; 71: 123-6. PMID:2988164[PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
33. Parazzini F, Cipriani S, Mangili G, Garavaglia E, Gu arnerio P,Ricci E, Benzi G, Salerio B, Polverino G, LaVecchia C. Oral contraceptives and risk of gestational trophoblastic disease. Contraception,
2002; 65: 425-7. PMID:12127642;
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-7824(02)00293-7[CrossRef], [PubMed], [Web of Science
®], [Google Scholar]
34. Parazzini F, La Vecchia C, Pampallona S. Parental
age and risk of complete and partial hydatidiform mole. Br J Obstet Gynaecol, 1986; 93: 582-5.
PMID:3755352;
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1986.tb07957.x[CrossRef], [PubMed], [Googl e Scholar]
35. Parazzini F, La
Vecchia C, Mangili G, Caminiti C, Negri E,Cecchett
i G, Fasoli M. Dietary factors and risk of
trophoblastic disease. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1988;
158: 93-9. PMID:2827487;
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(88)90785-5[CrossRef], [PubMed], [Web of Science
®], [Google Scholar]
36. Brews A.A Follow-up survey of the cases of
Obstetrics and Gynaecology). Proc R Soc Med, 1935; 28: 1213-2.
37. Slim R, Mehio A. The genetics of hydatidiform
moles: new lights on an ancient disease. Clin
Genet 2007; 71: 25-34. PMID:17204043;
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-0004.2006.00697.x
38. Candelier JJ, Frappart L, Diatta AL, Yadaden T, Cis
se ML,Afoutou JM, Picard JY, Mennesson B, Slim R, Si-Tayeb K, et al.
39. Kim MJ, Kim KR, Ro JY, Lage JM, Lee HI. Diagno
stic and pathogenetic significance of increased stromal apoptosis and incomplete vasculogenesis in complete hydatidiform moles in very early pregnancy periods. Am J Surg Pathol, 2006; 30: 362-9,
PMID:16538057[CrossRef], [PubMed], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar]
40. Kim KR, Sung CO, Kwon TJ, Lee J, Robboy SJ. De
fective pericyte recruitment of villous stromal vessels as the possible etiologic cause of hydropic change in complete hydatidiform mole. PLoS
One, 2015; 10: 0122266. PMID:25849742;
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0122266[Cro ssRef], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
41. Pijnenborg R, Bland JM, Robertson WB, Dixon G,
Brosens I. The pattern of interstitial trophoblastic invasion of the myometrium in early human
pregnancy. Placenta, 1981; 2: 303-16.
PMID:7301778;
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0143-4004(81)80027-6[CrossRef], [PubMed], [Web of
Science ®][Google Scholar]
42. Burton GJ. Oxygen, the Janus gas; its effects on human placental development and function. J
Anat, 2009; 215: 27-35. PMID:19175804;
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7580.2008.00978.x[CrossRef], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®][Google Scholar]
43. Candelier JJ, Frappart L, Diatta AL, Yadaden T, Cis
se ML, Afoutou JM, Picard JY, Mennesson B, Slim R, Si-Tayeb K, et al.Differential expression of
E-cadherin, β-catenin, and Lewis x
betweeninvasivehydatidiformmolesandpostmolarcho riocarcinomas.VirchowsArch, 2013; 462: 65363. PMID:23681114;http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s004280 131427z[CrossRef], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®][Google Scholar]
44. Wells M. The pathology of gestational trophoblastic disease: recent advances. Pathology, 2007; 39:
88-96, PMID:17365825;
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00313020601137367[Tayl or & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
45. Caniggia I, Mostachfi H, Winter J, Gassmann M, Ly
e SJ,Kuliszewski M, Post M. Hypoxia-inducible factor-1 mediates the biological effects of oxygen on
human trophoblast differentiation through
TGFbeta(3). J Clin Invest, 2000; 105: 577-87. PMID:10712429;
http://dx.doi.org/10.1172/JCI8316[CrossRef], [Pub Med], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
46. Soper JT, Surgical therapy for gestational
trophoblastic disease, J Reprod Med, 1994; 39(3): 168–174.
47. Tidy JA, Gillespie AM, Bright N, Radstone CR,
Coleman RE, Hancock BW, Gestational
trophoblastic disease: a study of mode of evacuation
and subsequent need for treatment with
chemotherapy, Gynecol Oncol, 2000; 78(3 Pt.1): 309–312
48. Kashimura Y, Kashimura M, Sugimori H,
Tsukamoto N, Matsuyama T, Matsukuma K, Kamura T, Saito T, Kawano H, Nose R et al., Prophylactic chemotherapy for hydatidiform mole. Five to 15 years follow-up, Cancer, 1986; 58(3):
624–629. 50Limpongsanurak S, Prophylactic
actinomycin D for high-risk complete hydatidiform mole, J Reprod Med, 2001; 46(2): 110–116.
49. Berkowitz RS, Goldstein DP, Clinical practice. Molar pregnancy, N Engl J Med, 2009; 360(16): 1639–1645.
50. Berkowitz RS, Goldstein DP, Marean AR, Bernstein
M, Oral contraceptives and postmolar gestational trophoblastic disease, Obstet Gynecol, 1981; 58(4): 474–477.
