Nidation Window: From Basic to Clinic

  • Alexandre Psychoyos
Part of the Serono Symposia USA book series (SERONOSYMP)


We shall have the opportunity during this symposium to hear about and discuss the tremendous recent achievements in the molecular and cellular aspects of the periimplantation processes. Currently, we can combine highly sophisticated molecular techniques and intervene, for example, in early development and implantation by gene deletions. However, only 100 years ago, when Fernand Lataste discovered lactational delayed implantation (1), no one was able to offer a rational explanation for this occurrence. Not until some 60 years later, in the early 1950s, was it discovered that this fascinating phenomenon can be induced experimentally by early ovariectomy (2–5).


Receptive Phase Endometrial Receptivity Uterine Receptivity Estradiol Valerate Human Blastocyst 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Lataste F. Des variations de durée de la gestation chez les mammifères et des circonstances qui déterminent ces variations: théorie de la gestation retardée. C R Soc Biol (Paris) 1891; 43: 21–31.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chambon Y. Réalisation du retard de l’implantation par des faibles doses de progestérone chez la ratte. C R Soc Biol (Paris) 1949; 143: 753–6.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Canivenc R, Laffargue M, Mayer G. Nidations retardées chez la ratte castrée et injectée de progestérone. C R Soc Biol (Paris) 1956; 12: 2208–12.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cochrane RL, Meyer RK. Delayed implantation in the rat induced by progesterone. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1957; 96: 155–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Psychoyos A, Alloiteau JJ. Castration précoce et nidation de l’oeuf chez la ratte. C R Soc Biol (Paris) 1962; 254: 46–9.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chang MC. Development and fate of transferred rabbit ova or blastocysts in relation to the ovulation time of recipients. J Exp Zool 1950; 114: 197225.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    McLaren A, Michie D. Studies on the transfer of fertilized mouse eggs to uterine foster-mothers, I. Factors affecting the implantation and survival of native and transferred eggs. J Exp Biol 1956; 33: 394–416.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Noyes RW, Dickmann Z. Relation of ovular age to endometrial development. J Reprod Fertil 1960; 1: 186–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Psychoyos A. Nouvelle contribution à l’étude de la nidation de l’oeuf chez la ratte. C R Acad Sci [III] 1960; 251: 3073–5.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Psychoyos A. Recent research on egg-implantation. In: Wolstenholme GEW, O’Connor M, eds. Ciba Foundation study group on egg implantation. Edinburgh: Churchill, 1966: 4–28.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Psychoyos A. Endocrine control of egg implantation. In: Greep RO, Astwood EB, eds. Handbook of physiology; vol II, Endocrinology. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1973: 187–215.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Psychoyos A. Hormonal control of uterine receptivity for nidation. J Reprod Fertil Suppl 1976; 25: 17–28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Psychoyos A. Uterine receptivity for nidation. Ann NY Acad Sci 1986; 476: 36–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Weitlauf HM. Biology of implantation. In:: Knobil E, Neill J, eds. The physiology of reproduction. New York: Raven Press, 1988: 231–62.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Parr MB, Parr EL. The implantation reaction. In: Wynn RM, ed. Biology of the uterus. New York: Plenum Press, 1989: 233–77.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Alloiteau JJ, Psychoyos A. Y-a-t-il pour l’oeuf de la ratte deux façons de perdre sa zone pellucide? C R Acad Sci [III] 1966; 262: 1561–4.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hertig AT. La nidation des oeufs humains fécondés normaux et anormaux. In: Ferin J, Gautefroy M, eds. Les fonctions de nidation utérine et leurs troubles. Masson, 1960: 169–213.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Buster JE, Bustillo M, Rodi IA, et al. Biologic and morphologic development of donated human ova recovered by nonsurgical uterine lavage. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 153: 211–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lindenberg S, Kimber SJ, Hamberger L, Falck Larsen J. Human implantation mechanism. In: Capitano GL, Asch RH, De Cecco L, Croce S, eds. GIFT: from basics to clinics. New York: Raven Press, 1989: 175–200.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rosenwaks Z. Donor eggs: their application in modern reproductive technologies. Fertil Steril 1987; 47: 895–909.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Navot D, Scott RT, Droesch K, Veeck LL, Liu HC, Rosenwaks Z. The window of embryo transfer and the efficacy of human conception in vitro. Fertil Steril 1991; 55: 114–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Paulson RJ, Sauer MV, Lobo RA. Embryo implantation after human in vitro fertilization: importance of endometrial receptivity. Fertil Steril 1990; 53: 870–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Potts M, Psychoyos A. Evolution de l’ultrastructure des relations ovoendométriales sous l’influence de l’oestrogêne chez la ratte en retard expérimental de nidation. C R Acad Sci [III] 1967; 264: 370–3.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nilsson O. Correlation of structure to function of the luminal cell surface in the uterine epithelium of mouse and man. Z Mikrosk Anat Forsch 1962; 56: 803–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Psychoyos A, Mandon P. Scanning electron microscopy of the surface of the rat uterine epithelium during delayed implantation. J Reprod Fertil 1971; 26: 137–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Psychoyos A, Mandon P. Etude de la surface de l’épithélium utérin au microscope électronique ä balayage. Observation chez la ratte au 4ème et Sème jours de la gestation. C R Acad Sci [III] 1971; 272: 2723–9.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Enders AD, Nelson DM. Pinocytotic activity of the uterus of the rat. Am J Anat 1973; 138: 277–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Parr MB, Parr EL. Uterine luminal epithelium: protrusions mediate endocytosis, not apocrine secretion, in the rat. Biol Reprod 1974; 11: 220–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sarantis L, Roche D, Psychoyos A. Displacement of receptivity for nidation in the rat by the progesterone antagonist RU 486: a scanning electron microscopy study. Hum Reprod 1988; 3: 251–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Martel D, Monier MN, Roche D, Psychoyos A. Hormonal dependence of pinopode formation at the uterine luminal surface. Hum Reprod 1991; 6: 597–603.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Martel D, Malet C, Gautray JP, Psychoyos A. Surface changes of the luminal uterine epithelium during the human menstrual cycle: a scanning electron microscopic study. In: de Brux J, Mortel R, Gautray JP, eds. The endometrium: hormonal impacts. New York: Plenum Press, 1981: 15–29.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Martel D, Frydman R, Glissant M, Maggioni C, Roche D, Psychoyos A. Scanning electron microscopy of postovulatory human endometrium in spontaneous cycles and cycles stimulated by hormone treatment. J Endocrinol 1987; 114: 319–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Martel D, Frydman R, Sarantis L, Roche D, Psychoyos A. Scanning electron microscopy of the uterine luminal epithelium as a marker of the implantation window. In: Yoshinaga K, ed. Blastocyst implantation. Boston: Adams Publishing Group, 1989: 225–30.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Massai MR, Bergeron C, Martel D, et al. Physiological estradiol and progesterone replacement cycles in women with ovarian failure: a model to study endometrial maturation and sex steroid receptors regulation by exogenous hormones. Hum Reprod 1993; 8: 1828–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Psychoyos A, Nikas G. Uterine pinopodes as markers of uterine receptivity. Assisted Reprod Rev 1994; 4: 26–32.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexandre Psychoyos

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations