Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Aim: Endometrial mesenchymal stem cells (eMSC) have a vital role in regeneration of endometrium during menstrual cycles. Since it has been suggested that (eMSC) likely play a role in uterine receptivity and establishment of pregnancy, we aimed to evaluate the expression levels of five most known receptivity markers-Integrin (ITG) β1, Rac1, HoxA11, ITGβ3 and Noggin-in eMSC of recurrent implantation failure (RIF) and non-RIF women.
Methods: Human eMSC were isolated from menstrual blood (MB) of RIF and non-RIF women. The isolated eMSC characterized based on their morphological and behavioral characteristics, expression of MSC-specific surface CD markers and their capacity of differentiation into osteocytes and adipocytes. The expression levels of the five mentioned receptivity markers were analyzed with real time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction.
Results: Our findings revealed that RIF and non-RIF eMSC expressed all tested genes at different levels. ITGb1 expression in RIF eMSC was lower than its expression in non-RIF cells. On the other hand, all the other markers were expressed at higher levels in RIF eMSC than in non-RIF cells although only HOXA11 and ITG β3 showed statistically significant (P < 0.05) higher expression levels.
Conclusion: This pilot study on determination of the expression levels of uterine receptivity markers in eMSC interestingly indicated that RIF and non-RIF eMSC were different regarding the expression of these markers. Future studies using these findings can brighten up more the role of eMSC in the endometrium receptivity and establishment of pregnancy.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jog.14340 | DOI Listing |