Flow cytometry used to distinguish between complete and partial hydatidiform moles

Fisher, R. A.; Lawler, Sylvia D.; Ormerod, M.G.; Imrie, P.R.; Povey, S.

doi:10.1016/0143-4004(87)90048-8

Cited by 41 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…have identified a collection of histopathological criteria which have significantly improved discrimination between these entities 7 . However, the CM and PM can usually be differentiated by determining the ploidy status of the lesion with DNA flow cytometry 8 , 9 . (It must be emphasized that DNA flow cytometry is only of value in distinguishing a diploid from a triploid mole once the diagnosis of molar pregnancy has been made histologically.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Over‐diagnosis of hydatidiform mole in early tubal ectopic pregnancy

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our results show that tubal ectopic hydatidiform mole is a rare entity and demonstrate that it is over-diagnosed. Polar trophoblastic proliferation and hydropic villi are features of early placentation and of hydropic abortion. Sheets of extravillous trophoblast may be particularly prominent in tubal ectopic gestation. In the absence of circumferential trophoblastic proliferation combined with hydropic change a diagnosis of gestational trophoblastic disease should be avoided.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Over‐diagnosis of hydatidiform mole in early tubal ectopic pregnancy

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently, flow cytometry has been successfully used to assess ploidy in hydatidiform mole. [10][11][12] Flow cytometry quantifies the amount of nuclear DNA in a large fraction of particular cells relative to their normal counterparts, and is an established method of ploidy analysis. Image analysis of the nuclear DNA content of a certain cell type appears to be more accurate than flow cytometry as the cells are selected based on their morphology.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Flow cytometry has been successfully used to assess nuclear ploidy in hydatidiform mole and hydropic abortus cases. [10][11][12] These methods have the intrinsic problem that they may include undesired cell populations and they lack the advantage of simultaneous assessment of tissue morphology. Recently, in situ hybridisation using chromosome specific probes has been shown to be a reproducible and valid method of detecting numerical chromosome aberrations and assessing nuclear ploidy in routinely processed, paraYn embedded tissue sections.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Interphase cytogenetic and AgNOR analyses of hydatidiform moles.

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim-To determine the potential value of interphase cytogenetic and argyrophilic nucleolar organiser region (AgNOR) analyses in the diagnosis and classification of hydatidiform moles. Methods-Serial tissue sections from 37 hydatidiform moles, histologically classified as 11 complete and 15 partial, and from 11 hydropic abortuses were examined by in situ hybridisation using digoxigenin labelled probes specific for chromosomes 1, X, and Y, and a one step silver staining method. The percentages of diploid and triploid nuclei, and the mean number of AgNORs for each tissue were determined. Results-Interphase cytogenetics showed that eight of the 11 cases (73%) each of complete mole and hydropic abortus had diploid pattern and the three remaining cases (27%) of each group were triploid. Two of the triploid complete moles and one of the triploid hydropic abortuses were revised to partial moles and one remaining triploid complete mole was revised to hydropic abortus. Of the 15 partial moles, nine (60%) were triploid, and six (40%) were diploid. These diploid cases were revised to three complete moles and three hydropic abortuses. There was a significant diVerence (p < 0.0001) between the mean (SD) AgNOR count in partial mole (5.11 (0.91)) versus hydropic abortus (3.79 (0.90)) and complete mole (3.39 (0.97)). The total of 15 triploid cases showed a high mean AgNOR count of 5.24 (0.73). Also, after reclassification, eight of the nine partial moles (89%) had a mean AgNOR count of > 5. The results of analyses by the two methods were closely correlated. Conclusions-Interphasecytogeneticanalysis using chromosome specific probes and AgNOR count provides a valuable approach for ploidy analysis in histological sections of hydatidiform moles and helps to resolve diYcult cases. (J Clin Pathol 1998;51:438-443)

show abstract

“…Researchers have access to the use of flow cytometry DNA ploidy analysis to distinguish the diploid CHM from the triploid PHM (23,24,25). However, there are cases of PHM that have been reported to have normal diploid karyotype (26), tetraploid (27), and triploid/diploid mosaic XX moles (28).…”

Section: Differences In Chm and Phmmentioning

confidence: 98%