جمعه 12 بهمن 1403
[Archive]
دوره 7، شماره 4 - ( 4-1388 )
جلد 7 شماره 4 صفحات 162-157 |
برگشت به فهرست نسخه ها
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Panahi M, Soleimani A, Abdolrahman Dezfoolian A. The ovarian stimulation effects on Muc1 expression of the mouse endometrium before implantation. IJRM 2009; 7 (4) :157-162
URL: http://ijrm.ir/article-1-159-fa.html
URL: http://ijrm.ir/article-1-159-fa.html
The ovarian stimulation effects on Muc1 expression of the mouse endometrium before implantation. International Journal of Reproductive BioMedicine. 1388; 7 (4) :157-162
چکیده: (2397 مشاهده)
Background: Acceptance of uterus and reaction between endometrium and embryo has an important role for implantation. Muc1 an integral membrane mucin is expressed on the apical surface of uterine epithelial cells and could have effects on its receptivity.
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the changes in Muc1 expression of gravid mouse endometrium with and without hyperstimulation before implantation.
Materials and Methods: Adult female NMRI mice were divided into control and experimental groups. Experimental group superovulated using an intraperitoneal injection of Pregnant Mare’s Serum Gonadotrophin (PMSG) followed 48 hours later by another injection of Human Chorionic Gonadotropic hormone (HCG). The female mice have mated with normal male mice. All control and hyperstimulated groups subdivided into six groups. After mating female mice were examined by vaginal plaque as day of zero and in 0-5 days after copulation they were sacrificed by cervical dislocation. Then the middle 1/3 parts of their uterine horns were obtained and stained by immunohistochemicaly technique for Muc-1 detection.
Results: Our results showed that in the control and hyperstimulated groups the Muc1 expression is markedly reduced in the luminal uterus epithelium at the time of implantation. Furthermore luminal and glandular uterus epithelium did not exhibit the same decrease in Muc1 expression during the receptive phase.
Conclusion: Ovarian hyperstimulation didn’t alter the Muc1 expression markedly in surface and glandular epithelium of endometrium which could affect on its receptivity.
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the changes in Muc1 expression of gravid mouse endometrium with and without hyperstimulation before implantation.
Materials and Methods: Adult female NMRI mice were divided into control and experimental groups. Experimental group superovulated using an intraperitoneal injection of Pregnant Mare’s Serum Gonadotrophin (PMSG) followed 48 hours later by another injection of Human Chorionic Gonadotropic hormone (HCG). The female mice have mated with normal male mice. All control and hyperstimulated groups subdivided into six groups. After mating female mice were examined by vaginal plaque as day of zero and in 0-5 days after copulation they were sacrificed by cervical dislocation. Then the middle 1/3 parts of their uterine horns were obtained and stained by immunohistochemicaly technique for Muc-1 detection.
Results: Our results showed that in the control and hyperstimulated groups the Muc1 expression is markedly reduced in the luminal uterus epithelium at the time of implantation. Furthermore luminal and glandular uterus epithelium did not exhibit the same decrease in Muc1 expression during the receptive phase.
Conclusion: Ovarian hyperstimulation didn’t alter the Muc1 expression markedly in surface and glandular epithelium of endometrium which could affect on its receptivity.
نوع مطالعه: Original Article |
فهرست منابع
1. Elsebeth SR, Eliezer S. Human trophoblast function during the implantation process. Reprod Biol 2005; 3:56.
2. Psychoyos A. The implantation window: can it be enlarged or displaced? In: Iizuka R, Semm K (eds.), Human Reproduction. Current Status/Future Prospect. Amsterdam: Excepta Media (International Congress) Ser 768; 231-232.
3. Giudice LC, Ferenczy A. The endometrial cycle. In: Adashi EY, Rock JA, Rosenwaks Z (eds.). Reproductive Endocrinology, Surgery, and Technology. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven1996: 272-300.
4. Schlafke S, Enders AC. Cellular Basis of interaction between trophoblast and uterus at implantation. Biol Reprod 1975; 12:41-65. [DOI:10.1095/biolreprod12.1.41]
5. Gendler SJ, Spicer AP. Epithelial mucin genes. Annu Rev Physiol 1995; 57: 607-634. [DOI:10.1146/annurev.ph.57.030195.003135]
6. Aplin JD. Adhesion molecules in implantation. Rev Reprod 1997; 2: 84-93. [DOI:10.1530/ror.0.0020084]
7. Parry G, Li J, Stubbs J, Bissell M, Schmidhauser C, Spicer AP, et al. Studies of Muc1 mucin expression and polarity in the mouse mammary gland demonestrate developmental regulation of Muc1 glycosilation and establish the hormonal basis for mRNA expression. J Cell Sci 1992; 101:191-199.
8. Surveyor GA, Gendler SJ, Pemberton L, Das SK, Carson DD. Expression and steroid hormonal control of Muc-1 in the mouse uterus. Endocrinol 1995; 136:3639-3647. [DOI:10.1210/endo.136.8.7628404]
9. Maria VC, Marina TL, Carina ER, Martin ER, Sandra JG, Amada SE. Pattern of MUC1 tissue defined by an anti-MUC1 cytoplasmic tail monoclonal antibody in breast cancer. J Histichem Cytochem 2003; 51:781-788. [DOI:10.1177/002215540305100609]
10. llene KG, Samuel BH, Sandra JS, Ann ST, Qian Z, Emina T, et al. Mucin gene expression by human female reproductive tract epithelia. Biol Reprod 1997; 56: 999-1011. [DOI:10.1095/biolreprod56.4.999]
11. Dey SK, Lim H, Das SK, Reese J, Paria BC, Daikoku T, et al. Molecular cues to implantation. Endocr Rev 2004; 25, 341-373. [DOI:10.1210/er.2003-0020]
12. Wimsatt W. Some comparative aspects of implantation. Biol Reprod 1975; 12: 1-40. [DOI:10.1095/biolreprod12.1.1]
13. De los santos MJ, Mercader A, Galan A, Albert C, Romero JL, Pellicer A. Implantation rates after two, three, or five days of embryo culture. Placenta 2003; 24: 13-19. [DOI:10.1016/S0143-4004(03)00172-3]
14. Strous GJ, Dekker J. Mucin-type glycoproteins. Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol 1992; 27: 57-92. [DOI:10.3109/10409239209082559]
15. Lagow E, Desouza MM, Carson DD. Mammalian reproductive tract mucins. Hum Reprod Update 1999; 5:280-292. [DOI:10.1093/humupd/5.4.280]
16. Aplin JD, Hey NA. MUC1, endometrium and embryo implantation. Biochem Soc Trans 1995; 23: 826-831. [DOI:10.1042/bst0230826]
17. Coccia ME, Comparetto C, Bracco GL, Scarselli G. GnRH antagonist. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2004; 115: 44-56. [DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2004.01.033]
18. Tarlatzis BC, Bili H. Safety of GnRH agonists and antagonists. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2004; 3: 39-46. [DOI:10.1517/14740338.3.1.39]
19. Ruan HC, Zhu XM, Luo Q, Liu AX, Qian YL, Zhou CY, et al. Ovarian stimulation with GnRH agonist, but not GnRH antagonist, partially restores the expression of endometrial integrin ß3 and leukaemia-inhibitory factor and improves uterine receptivity in mice. Hum Reprod 2006; 21: 2521-2529. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/del215]
20. Devroey P, Bouragain C, Macklon NS, Fauser BC. Reproductive biology and IVF: ovarian stimulation and endometrial receptivity. Trends Endocrinol Metab 2004; 15: 84-90. [DOI:10.1016/j.tem.2004.01.009]
21. Kolibianakis E, Bourgain C, Albano C, Osmanagaoglu K, Smitz J, Van Steirteghem A, et al. Effect of ovarian stimulation with recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone, gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonists, and human chorionic gonadotropin on endometrial maturation on the day of pick-up. Fertil Steril 2002; 78: 1025-1029. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(02)03323-X]
22. Fossum GT, Davidsou A, Paulson RJ. Ovarian hyperstimulation inhibits embryo implantation in the mouse. Fertil Embryo Transfer 1989; 6: 7-10. [DOI:10.1007/BF01134574]
23. Karmer B, Stein BA, Van de Walt LA. Exogenous gonadotropins-serum oestrogen and progestrone and the effect on endometrial morphology in the rat. J Anat 1990; 173: 177-189.
24. Basir GH, War-sum O, Hung Yu Ng E, Chung Ho P. Morphometric analysis of peri-implantation endometrium in patients having excessively high oestradiol concentration after ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod 2002; 16: 435-440. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/16.3.435]
25. Ubaldi F, Bourgain C, Tournaye H, Smitz J. Endometrial evaluation by aspiration biopsy on the day of oocyte retrieval in the embryo transfer cycles in patients with serum progestrone rise during the follicular phase. Fertil Steril 1997; 67: 521-526. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(97)80080-5]
26. Mirkin S, Nikas G, Hsiu JG. Gene expression profiles and structural /functional features of the peri-implantation endometrium in natural and gonadotropin-stimulated cycles. J Clinal Endocrinol Metab 2004; 89: 5742-5752. [DOI:10.1210/jc.2004-0605]
27. Lee KY, DeMayo FJ. Animal models of implantation. Reproduction 2004; 128: 679-695. [DOI:10.1530/rep.1.00340]
| بازنشر اطلاعات | |
 |
این مقاله تحت شرایط Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License قابل بازنشر است. |
