Expression of matrix metalloproteinases and their inhibitors at the implantation site in ampullary ectopic pregnancies
Carregando...
Citações na Scopus
0
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2021
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
ELSEVIER MASSON, CORP OFF
Autores
RODRIGUES, Agatha Sacramento
HOSHIDA, Mara Sandra
Citação
JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY OBSTETRICS AND HUMAN REPRODUCTION, v.50, n.5, article ID 102096, 5p, 2021
Resumo
Objective: This study investigated the qualitative and semi-quantitative expression of metalloproteinases (MMP) and their tissue inhibitors (TIMP) in trophoblastic tissue during ampullary ectopic pregnancies and correlated that expression with the degree of tubal invasion. Study design: It is a prospective study that included 34 patients diagnosed with ampullary tubal pregnancy who underwent salpingectomy. A histological evaluation of the depth of trophoblastic invasion in the tubes obtained was performed. Subsequently, the expression of the MMP-2, MMP-9, MMP-14, TIMP-1, TIMP-2 and TIMP-3 markers was qualitatively and semi-quantitatively evaluated by indirect immunohistochemistry. In addition, the degree of trophoblastic invasion was correlated with the expression of each marker and with the metalloproteinase/inhibitor ratios. Results: MMP-2 (11.2 %; 3.6-17.9) was the marker with greater expression at the implantation site, both in the qualitative and semi-quantitative assessment, while MMP-9 (2.23 %; 0.2-5.4) and TIMP-3 (2.53 %; 0.1-15.3) were only weakly expressed. Conclusion: There was wide variation in expression among the markers and metalloproteinase/inhibitor ratios studied compared to the degrees of invasion.
Palavras-chave
Pregnancy, Ectopic, Metalloproteases, Matrix metalloproteases, Tissue inhibitor of metalloproteases, Matrix metalloprotease inhibitor
Referências
- Anacker J, 2011, MOL HUM REPROD, V17, P637, DOI 10.1093/molehr/gar033
- Bai SX, 2005, REPRODUCTION, V129, P103, DOI 10.1530/rep.1.00283
- Bouyer J, 2002, HUM REPROD, V17, P3224, DOI 10.1093/humrep/17.12.3224
- BROWN DL, 1991, OBSTET GYNECOL, V77, P406
- Cabar FR, 2006, HUM REPROD, V21, P2426, DOI 10.1093/humrep/del170
- Cabar FR, 2016, CLINICS, V71, P699, DOI 10.6061/clinics/2016(12)04
- Christiane Y, 2014, Rev Med Liege, V69, P46
- Diaz PS, 2012, REPROD BIOL ENDOCRIN, V10, DOI 10.1186/1477-7827-10-56
- Feng H, 2017, BIOSCIENCE REP, V37, P15
- GREEN LK, 1989, INT J GYNECOL PATHOL, V8, P255, DOI 10.1097/00004347-198909000-00009
- Kleiner DE, 1993, CURR OPIN CELL BIOL, V5, P891, DOI 10.1016/0955-0674(93)90040-W
- Kucera E, 2000, WIEN KLIN WOCHENSCHR, V112, P749
- Latifi Z, 2018, J CELL PHYSIOL, V233, P4530, DOI 10.1002/jcp.26259
- Lindsey ML, 2012, CARDIOVASC THER, V30, P31, DOI 10.1111/j.1755-5922.2010.00207.x
- Mahecha AM, 2017, ONCOTARGETS THER, V10, P4617, DOI 10.2147/OTT.S132558
- Natale A, 2003, FERTIL STERIL, V79, P981, DOI 10.1016/s0015-0282(02)04922-1
- OKTAY K, 1994, OBSTET GYNECOL, V84, P803
- Olszewska E, 2016, HISTOL HISTOPATHOL, V31, P307, DOI 10.14670/HH-11-677
- Pereira PP, 2009, ULTRASOUND OBST GYN, V33, P472, DOI 10.1002/uog.6333
- Qin XJ, 1997, BIOL REPROD, V56, P800, DOI 10.1095/biolreprod56.4.800
- Qiu XY, 2011, ACTA OBSTET GYN SCAN, V90, P966, DOI 10.1111/j.1600-0412.2011.01206.x
- Shao RJ, 2012, AM J TRANSL RES, V4, P269
- Shaw JLV, 2010, HUM REPROD UPDATE, V16, P432, DOI 10.1093/humupd/dmp057