A new method for endometrial dating using computerized virtual pathology – Scientific

  • Treloar, A. E., Boynton, R. E. & Behn, B. G. Variation of the human menstrual cycle through reproductive life. Int. J. Fertil. 12, 77–126 (1967).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Noyes, R. W., Hertig, A. T. & Rock, J. Dating the endometrial biopsy. Fertil. Steril. 1(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)30062-0 (1950).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ferenczy, A. & Mutter, G. The endometrial cycle. Glob. Libr. Women Med. https://doi.org/10.3843/GLOWM.10293 (2008).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Acosta, A. A. et al. Endometrial dating and determination of the window of implantation in healthy fertile women. Fertil. Steril. 73(4), 788–798 (2000).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Carson, D. D. et al. Embryo implantation. Dev. Biol. 223(2), 217–237 (2000).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Murray, M. J. et al. A critical analysis of the accuracy, reproducibility, and clinical utility of histologic endometrial dating in fertile women. Fertil. Steril. 81(5), 1333–1343 (2004).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bakos, O., Lundkvist, Ö., Wide, L. & Bergh, T. Ultrasonographical and hormonal description of the normal ovulatory menstrual cycle. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 73(10), 790–6. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016349409072507 (1994).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Shoupe, D. et al. Correlation of endometrial maturation with four methods of estimating day of ovulation. Obstet. Gynecol. 73(1), 88–92 (1989).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Yoshimitsu, K., Nakamura, G. & Nakano, H. Dating sonographic endometrial images in the normal ovulatory cycle. Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet. 28(1), 33–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7292%2889%2990541-9 (1989).

    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Gingold, J. A. et al. Endometrial pattern, but not endometrial thickness, affects implantation rates in euploid embryo transfers. Fertil. Steril. 104(3), 620-628.e5 (2015).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kovacs, P., Matyas, S., Boda, K. & Kaali, S. G. The effect of endometrial thickness on IVF/ICSI outcome. Hum. Reprod. 18(11), 2337–2341 (2003).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Stricker, R. R. et al. Establishment of detailed reference values for luteinizing hormone, follicle stimulating hormone, estradiol, and progesterone during different phases of the menstrual cycle on the Abbott ARCHITECT® analyzer. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. (CCLM) 44(7), 883–7 (2006).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Lessey, B. A. et al. Immunohistochemical analysis of human uterine estrogen and progesterone receptors throughout the menstrual cycle*. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 67(2), 334–40. https://doi.org/10.1210/jcem-67-2-334 (1988).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Díaz-Gimeno, P. et al. The accuracy and reproducibility of the endometrial receptivity array is superior to histology as a diagnostic method for endometrial receptivity. Fertil. Steril. 99(2), 508–517 (2013).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Coutifaris, C. et al. Histological dating of timed endometrial biopsy tissue is not related to fertility status. Fertil. Steril. 82(5), 1264–72 (2004).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Myers, E. R. et al. Interobserver and intraobserver variability in the histological dating of the endometrium in fertile and infertile women. Fertil. Steril. 82(5), 1278–1282 (2004).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Achache, H. & Revel, A. Endometrial receptivity markers, the journey to successful embryo implantation. Hum. Reprod. Update 12(6), 731–46 (2006).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Franasiak, J. M., Ruiz-Alonso, M., Scott, R. T. & Simón, C. Both slowly developing embryos and a variable pace of luteal endometrial progression may conspire to prevent normal birth in spite of a capable embryo. Fertil. Steril. 105(4), 861–6 (2016).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ruiz-Alonso, M. et al. The endometrial receptivity array for diagnosis and personalized embryo transfer as a treatment for patients with repeated implantation failure. Fertil. Steril. 100(3), 818–24 (2013).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ruiz-Alonso, M., Galindo, N., Pellicer, A. & Simón, C. What a difference two days make: Personalized embryo transfer (pET) paradigm: A case report and pilot study. Hum. Reprod. 29(6), 1244–1247 (2014).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Yoshinaga K. Uterine Receptivity for Blastocyst Implantation Synchrony of Embryo Development and Uterine Preparation for Implantation. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Koji_Yoshinaga/publication/20098280_Uterine_Receptivity_for_Blastocyst_Implantation/links/5678067908ae0ad265c80273.pdf.

  • Zhang, S. et al. Physiological and molecular determinants of embryo implantation. Mol. Aspects Med. 34(5), 939–80 (2013).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Taylor, H. S., Pal, L. & Emre, S. Speroff’s Clinical Gynecologic, Endocrinology and Infertility (Wolters Kluwer, 2020).


    Google Scholar
     

  • Wilcox, A. J., Baird, D. D. & Weinberg, C. R. Time of implantation of the conceptus and loss of pregnancy. N. Engl. J. Med. 340(23), 1796–9. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199906103402304 (1999).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Yoshinaga, K. Uterine receptivity for blastocyst implantation. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 541(1), 424–431 (1988).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Diedrich, K., Fauser, B. C. J. M. J. M., Devroey, P. & Griesinger, G. The role of the endometrium and embryo in human implantation. Hum. Reprod. Update 13(4), 365–77 (2007).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Navot, D. et al. The window of embryo transfer and the efficiency of human conception in vitro. Fertil. Steril. 55(1), 114–8 (1991).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ferenczy, A. & Mutter, G. L. The endometrial cycle. Glob. Lib. Women Med. 2228, 1–18 (2009).


    Google Scholar
     

  • Bellver, J. & Simón, C. Implantation failure of endometrial origin: What is new?. Curr. Opin. Obstet. Gynecol. 30(4), 229–236 (2018).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Blesa, D., Ruiz-Alonso, M. & Simón, C. Clinical management of endometrial receptivity. Semin. Reprod. Med. 32(05), 410–4. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1376360 (2014).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Governini, L., Luongo, F. P., Haxhiu, A., Piomboni, P. & Luddi, A. Main actors behind the endometrial receptivity and successful implantation. Tissue Cell 73, 101656 (2021).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Miravet-Valenciano, J. A., Rincon-Bertolin, A., Vilella, F. & Simon, C. Understanding and improving endometrial receptivity. Curr. Opin. Obstet. Gynecol. 27(3), 187–192 (2015).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Valbuena, D., Valdes, C. T. & Simon, C. Introduction: Endometrial function: Facts, urban legends, and an eye to the future. Fertil. Steril. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.05.030 (2017).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Leiva, R. A., Bouchard, T. P., Abdullah, S. H. & Ecochard, R. Urinary Luteinizing hormone tests: Which concentration threshold best predicts ovulation?. Front. Public Health 5, 320 (2017).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Belsey, E. M. & Farley, T. M. M. The analysis of menstrual bleeding patterns: A review. Appl. Stoch. Models Data Anal. 3(3), 125–50. https://doi.org/10.1002/asm.3150030302 (1987).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Fehring, R. J., Schneider, M. & Raviele, K. Variability in the phases of the menstrual cycle. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Neonatal Nurs. 35(3), 376–84 (2006).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Simón, C. et al. A 5-year multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing personalized, frozen and fresh blastocyst transfer in IVF. Reprod. Biomed. Online 41(3), 402–415 (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rafael, Z. B. Endometrial receptivity analysis (ERA) test: An unproven technology. Hum. Reprod. Open https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoab010 (2021).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Lensen, S., Sadler, L. & Farquhar, C. Endometrial scratching for subfertility: Everyone’s doing it. Hum. Reprod. 31(6), 1241–1244 (2016).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Franasiak, J. M. & Scott, R. T. Contribution of immunology to implantation failure of euploid embryos. Fertil. Steril. 107(6), 1279–1283 (2017).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sebastian-Leon, P., Garrido, N., Remohí, J., Pellicer, A. & Diaz-Gimeno, P. Asynchronous and pathological windows of implantation: Two causes of recurrent implantation failure. Hum. Reprod. 33(4), 626–35 (2018).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Duggan, M. A. et al. The accuracy and interobserver reproducibility of endometrial dating. Pathology 33(3), 292–297 (2001).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Fadare, O. & Zheng, W. Histologic dating of the endometrium: Accuracy, reproducibility, and practical value. Adv. Anat. Pathol. 12(2), 39–46 (2005).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Scott, R. T. et al. The effect of interobserver variation in dating endometrial histology on the diagnosis of luteal phase defects. Fertil. Steril. 50(6), 888–92 (1988).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Smith, S., Hosid, S. & Scott, L. Endometrial biopsy dating. Interobserver variation and its impact on clinical practice. J. Reprod. Med. 40(1), 1–3 (1995).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kolatt, T. S. et al. Revealing the uterine blood vessel network via virtual pathology. Reprod. Fertil. https://doi.org/10.1530/RAF-22-0135 (2023).

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Stricker, R. R. et al. Establishment of detailed reference values for luteinizing hormone, follicle stimulating hormone, estradiol, and progesterone during different phases of the menstrual cycle on the Abbott ARCHITECT® analyzer. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. 44(7), 883–887 (2006).

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Noyes, R. W., Hertig, A. T. & Rock, J. Dating the endometrial biopsy. Obstet. Gynecol. Surv. 5(4), 561–4 (1950).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hendrickson, M. R. & Kempson, R. L. Decision tree for endometrial dating. In Surgical Pathology of the Uterine Corpus Vol. 12 (ed. Bennington, J. L.) 80–85 (WB Saunders, 1980).


    Google Scholar
     



  • This article was originally published by a www.nature.com . Read the Original article here. .