国际生殖健康/计划生育杂志

国际生殖健康/计划生育 ›› 2020, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (1): 12-14.

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

2种内膜准备方案对反复种植失败患者子宫内膜孕激素受体和整合素αⅤβ3表达的影响

许虹，康小玲，徐丽清，朱秀兰，张曦倩   

  1. 510010  广东省妇幼保健院生殖健康与不孕症科（许虹，徐丽清，朱秀兰，张曦倩），病理科（康小玲）
  • 收稿日期:2019-10-16 修回日期:2019-11-28 出版日期:2020-01-15 发布日期:2020-01-15
  • 通讯作者: 张曦倩，E-mail：651557075@qq.com E-mail:1372835889@qq.com
  • 基金资助:
    广东省医学科研基金（A2016562）

Effects of Two Endometrial Preparation Regimens on the Expressions of Endometrial Progesterone Receptor and Integrin αⅤβ3 in Patients with Repeated Implantation Failure

XU Hong，KANG Xiao-ling，XU Li-qing，ZHU Xiu-lan，ZHANG Xi-qian   

  1. Department of Reproductive Health & Infertility（XU Hong，XU Li-qing，ZHU Xiu-lan，ZHANG Xi-qian），Department of Pathology（KANG Xiao-ling），Guangdong Woman and Children Hospital，Guangzhou 510010，China
  • Received:2019-10-16 Revised:2019-11-28 Published:2020-01-15 Online:2020-01-15
  • Contact: ZHANG Xi-qian，E-mail：651557075@qq.com E-mail:1372835889@qq.com

PDF (PC)

9347

摘要： 目的：比较自然周期（NC）和激素替代（HRT）子宫内膜准备方案对反复种植失败（RIF）患者种植窗口期子宫内膜孕激素受体（PR）、整合素αⅤβ3表达的影响，探讨这2种方案对种植窗口期子宫内膜容受性的影响。方法：收集25例NC方案和18例HRT方案RIF患者的黄体中期子宫内膜，采用免疫组化法检测2组患者种植窗口期子宫内膜PR和整合素αⅤβ3的表达。结果：2组患者子宫内膜腺上皮细胞PR、整合素αⅤβ3和间质细胞中PR表达的H-score评分比较，差异均无统计学意义（均P＞0.05）。结论：NC和HRT内膜准备方案对RIF患者种植窗口期子宫内膜容受性影响一致，此两种内膜准备方案均可应用于RIF患者。

关键词: 胚胎植入, 排卵诱导, 激素替代疗法, 受体, 孕酮, 反复种植失败, 自然周期, 整合素αⅤβ3

Abstract: Objective：To compare the effects of natural cycle (NC) and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) cycle on the expressions of endometrial progesterone receptor (PR) and integrin αⅤβ3 in patients with Repeated Implantation Failure (RIF), so as to explore the effects of these two endometrial preparation regimens on the endometrial receptivity during the implantation window. Methods: The endometrial specimens during mid-luteal phase were collected from 25 patients with NC cycle and 18 patients with HRT cycle. The expression levels of integrin αⅤβ3 and PR were detected by immunohistochemical method. Results: There were no significant differences in the mean H-scores of PR and integrin αⅤβ3 expression in endometrial glandular epithelial cells, and PR expression in stromal cells, between the NC regimen group and the HRT regimen group (P＞0.05). Conclusions: There are no significant differences in the effects of NC regimen and HRT regimen on the endometrial receptivity during the implantation window, suggesting that these two endometrial preparation protocols are suitable for patients with RIF.

Key words: Embryo implantation, Ovulation induction, Hormone replacement therapy, Receptors, progesterone, Repeated implantation failure, Natural cycle, Integrin alphaⅤbeta3