Yingyu Liu1, Xiaoyan Chen1, Jin Huang1, Chi-Chiu Wang2, Mei-Yung Yu3, Susan Laird4, Tin-Chiu Li5. 1. Assisted Reproductive Technology Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR China. 2. Assisted Reproductive Technology Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR China; Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR China; School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR China. 3. Department of Anatomical and Cellular Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR China. 4. Biomolecular Sciences Research Centre, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, United Kingdom. 5. Assisted Reproductive Technology Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR China. Electronic address: tinchiu.li@cuhk.edu.hk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the prevalence of chronic endometritis (CE) when different diagnostic methods are used. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: University-affiliated hospital. PATIENT(S): Four groups of women were studied, including women with proven fertility (Fertile; n = 40), unexplained recurrent miscarriage (RM; n = 93), recurrent implantation failure (RIF; n = 39), and infertile subjects undergoing endometrial scratch in a natural cycle preceding frozen-thawed embryo transfer (Infertility; n = 48). INTERVENTION(S): Endometrial biopsy was performed precisely 7 days after LH surge (LH+7). Plasma cells were identified by means of traditional hematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining and by means of immunohistochemistry (IHC) for Syndecan-1 (CD138). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Prevalence of CE. RESULT(S): The use of CD138 epitope was more sensitive than HE staining in identifying plasma cells. The use of plasma cell count per unit area had the lowest observer variability compared with cell count per ten randomly chosen high-power fields and cell count per section. Using this method, the prevalence of CE in women with RM, RIF, and Infertility were 10.8%, 7.7%, and 10.4%, respectively, not significantly higher than that of Fertile subjects (5.0%). CONCLUSION(S): Using what may be a new method of plasma cell assessment, it appears that the prevalence rates of CE reported in many earlier studies may have been overestimated. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR-IOC-16007882.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the prevalence of chronic endometritis (CE) when different diagnostic methods are used. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: University-affiliated hospital. PATIENT(S): Four groups of women were studied, including women with proven fertility (Fertile; n = 40), unexplained recurrent miscarriage (RM; n = 93), recurrent implantation failure (RIF; n = 39), and infertile subjects undergoing endometrial scratch in a natural cycle preceding frozen-thawed embryo transfer (Infertility; n = 48). INTERVENTION(S): Endometrial biopsy was performed precisely 7 days after LH surge (LH+7). Plasma cells were identified by means of traditional hematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining and by means of immunohistochemistry (IHC) for Syndecan-1 (CD138). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Prevalence of CE. RESULT(S): The use of CD138 epitope was more sensitive than HE staining in identifying plasma cells. The use of plasma cell count per unit area had the lowest observer variability compared with cell count per ten randomly chosen high-power fields and cell count per section. Using this method, the prevalence of CE in women with RM, RIF, and Infertility were 10.8%, 7.7%, and 10.4%, respectively, not significantly higher than that of Fertile subjects (5.0%). CONCLUSION(S): Using what may be a new method of plasma cell assessment, it appears that the prevalence rates of CE reported in many earlier studies may have been overestimated. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR-IOC-16007882.
Authors: N S Herlihy; A M Klimczak; S Titus; C Scott; B M Hanson; J K Kim; E Seli; R T Scott Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2022-01-22 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: Mengni Shen; Elizabeth O'Donnell; Gabriela Leon; Ana Kisovar; Pedro Melo; Krina Zondervan; Ingrid Granne; Jennifer Southcombe Journal: Hum Reprod Open Date: 2021-12-25
Authors: Vera R Mitter; Sheila Meier; Tilman T Rau; Tessa Gillon; Michael D Mueller; Marcel Zwahlen; Michael von Wolff; Alexandra S Kohl Schwartz Journal: Am J Reprod Immunol Date: 2021-08-09 Impact factor: 3.886