Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Comparison of Exosome Presence and Morphologic Changes Between Implantation and Inter-Implantation Areas in Rat's Utero by Confocal Microscope and SEM

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 49 Sayı: 2, 271 - 277, 13.06.2022
https://doi.org/10.5798/dicletip.1128820

Öz

Kaynakça

  • 1.Machtinger R, Laurent LC, Baccarelli AA.Extracellular vesicles: roles in gamete maturation,fertilization and embryo implantation. Hum ReprodUpdate. 2016;22:182-93.
  • 2.Homer H, Rice GE, Salomon C. Review: Embryo- and endometrium-derived exosomes and theirpotential role in assisted reproductive treatments-liquid biopsies for endometrial receptivity. Placenta. 2017;54:89-94.
  • 3.Makieva S, Giacomini E, Ottolina J, et al. Inside theEndometrial Cell Signaling Subway: Mind the Gap(s). Int J Mol Sci. 2018;19:2477.
  • 4.Waclawik A, Kaczmarek MM, Blitek A, et al.Embryo-maternal dialogue during pregnancyestablishment and implantation in the pig. MolReprod Dev. 2017;84:842-55.

Comparison of Exosome Presence and Morphologic Changes Between Implantation and Inter-Implantation Areas in Rat's Utero by Confocal Microscope and SEM

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 49 Sayı: 2, 271 - 277, 13.06.2022
https://doi.org/10.5798/dicletip.1128820

Öz

Aim: In this study, it was aimed to compare the differences between the implantation and interimplantation sites in terms of the presence and release density of exosomes.
Method: Wistar albino strains were used in this study. The rats were considered pregnant with the presence of vaginal plugs after mating. Then the rats were sacrificed on the 6th day when the embryos first attach to the uterus and implantation started. Implantation and inter-implantation sites were easily identified by staining the implantation sites with intravenous Chicago Blue dye given just before sacrification. After tissue preparation, sections were placed on slides. Exosomes detected with anti-CD63 fluoresence staining and imaged by confocal microscope. Further these sites were evaluated by Scaning electron microscopy (SEM).
Result: When implantation and inter implantation sites compared, it was observed that amont of exosomes was higher than inter-implantation sites in confocal images. Additionally, SEM images confirmed the confocal results of these sites.
Conclusion: Our study is the first in the literature to compare implantation and inter-implantation areas in terms of the presence of exosomes. These results probably suggested that the exosome plays an important role in implantation for the embryo to find the correct implantation site. Probably these exosomes must carry the necessary signals to find the right implantation site. However, further studies are needed to reveal the function of exosomes in implantation sites.

Kaynakça

  • 1.Machtinger R, Laurent LC, Baccarelli AA.Extracellular vesicles: roles in gamete maturation,fertilization and embryo implantation. Hum ReprodUpdate. 2016;22:182-93.
  • 2.Homer H, Rice GE, Salomon C. Review: Embryo- and endometrium-derived exosomes and theirpotential role in assisted reproductive treatments-liquid biopsies for endometrial receptivity. Placenta. 2017;54:89-94.
  • 3.Makieva S, Giacomini E, Ottolina J, et al. Inside theEndometrial Cell Signaling Subway: Mind the Gap(s). Int J Mol Sci. 2018;19:2477.
  • 4.Waclawik A, Kaczmarek MM, Blitek A, et al.Embryo-maternal dialogue during pregnancyestablishment and implantation in the pig. MolReprod Dev. 2017;84:842-55.
Toplam 4 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Sağlık Kurumları Yönetimi
Bölüm Original Articles
Yazarlar

Filiz Yılmaz Bu kişi benim

Seyda Demır Bu kişi benim

H. Alper Bagrıyanık Bu kişi benim

Yayımlanma Tarihi 13 Haziran 2022
Gönderilme Tarihi 8 Haziran 2021
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2022 Cilt: 49 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Yılmaz, F., Demır, S., & Bagrıyanık, H. A. (2022). Comparison of Exosome Presence and Morphologic Changes Between Implantation and Inter-Implantation Areas in Rat’s Utero by Confocal Microscope and SEM. Dicle Medical Journal, 49(2), 271-277. https://doi.org/10.5798/dicletip.1128820
AMA Yılmaz F, Demır S, Bagrıyanık HA. Comparison of Exosome Presence and Morphologic Changes Between Implantation and Inter-Implantation Areas in Rat’s Utero by Confocal Microscope and SEM. diclemedj. Haziran 2022;49(2):271-277. doi:10.5798/dicletip.1128820
Chicago Yılmaz, Filiz, Seyda Demır, ve H. Alper Bagrıyanık. “Comparison of Exosome Presence and Morphologic Changes Between Implantation and Inter-Implantation Areas in Rat’s Utero by Confocal Microscope and SEM”. Dicle Medical Journal 49, sy. 2 (Haziran 2022): 271-77. https://doi.org/10.5798/dicletip.1128820.
EndNote Yılmaz F, Demır S, Bagrıyanık HA (01 Haziran 2022) Comparison of Exosome Presence and Morphologic Changes Between Implantation and Inter-Implantation Areas in Rat’s Utero by Confocal Microscope and SEM. Dicle Medical Journal 49 2 271–277.
IEEE F. Yılmaz, S. Demır, ve H. A. Bagrıyanık, “Comparison of Exosome Presence and Morphologic Changes Between Implantation and Inter-Implantation Areas in Rat’s Utero by Confocal Microscope and SEM”, diclemedj, c. 49, sy. 2, ss. 271–277, 2022, doi: 10.5798/dicletip.1128820.
ISNAD Yılmaz, Filiz vd. “Comparison of Exosome Presence and Morphologic Changes Between Implantation and Inter-Implantation Areas in Rat’s Utero by Confocal Microscope and SEM”. Dicle Medical Journal 49/2 (Haziran 2022), 271-277. https://doi.org/10.5798/dicletip.1128820.
JAMA Yılmaz F, Demır S, Bagrıyanık HA. Comparison of Exosome Presence and Morphologic Changes Between Implantation and Inter-Implantation Areas in Rat’s Utero by Confocal Microscope and SEM. diclemedj. 2022;49:271–277.
MLA Yılmaz, Filiz vd. “Comparison of Exosome Presence and Morphologic Changes Between Implantation and Inter-Implantation Areas in Rat’s Utero by Confocal Microscope and SEM”. Dicle Medical Journal, c. 49, sy. 2, 2022, ss. 271-7, doi:10.5798/dicletip.1128820.
Vancouver Yılmaz F, Demır S, Bagrıyanık HA. Comparison of Exosome Presence and Morphologic Changes Between Implantation and Inter-Implantation Areas in Rat’s Utero by Confocal Microscope and SEM. diclemedj. 2022;49(2):271-7.