Advertisement

In Vitro Systems to Study Embryo-Maternal Interactions

  • J. K. Findlay
Part of the Reproductive Biology book series (RBIO)

Abstract

Is it possible to set up an in vitro culture system which will mimic implantation in vivo? Such a system would have to accommodate acquisition of receptivity of the endometrial cells, apposition and adhesion of the trophectoderm to the endometrial epithelial layer and, if appropriate to the species, penetration of the endometrium and the subsequent modifications to the subepithelial cells and the penetrating trophoblast. In 1981, Enders et al., critically compared the in vitro systems which were available at the time and said that there is no such thing as in vitro implantation, although “it is possible to make models, if not of normal implantation, at least of ectopic implantation”. Significant advances in the techniques of cell culture have occurred in the past decade which, when applied to endometrium and blastocyst, have allowed us to study the interaction of the blastocyst and endometrium in vitro in a way which is better defined and more successful than was possible previously. Only time will tell whether or not these new in vitro models for studying embryo-maternal interactions are more relevant than earlier models. There have also been major advances in our understanding of the cytokines and other local regulatory substances acting between the trophectoderm and endometrium and within the endometrium, knowledge about the role of the extracellular matrix in cellular function, and information about mesenchymal-epithelial interactions.

Keywords

Endometrial Cell Stromal Fibroblast Endometrial Epithelial Cell Uterine Epithelial Cell Australia Introduction 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Carson, D.D., Jacobs, A.L., Julian, J., Rohde, L.H., and Valdizan, M.C., 1992, Glycoconjugates as positive and negative modulators of embryo implantation, Reprod. Fert. Dev. 4:271–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Clark, D.A., 1993, Cytokines, decidua and early pregnancy, in “Oxford Reviews of Reproductive Biology”, S.R. Milligan, ed., Clarendon Press, Oxford. pp.83–111.Google Scholar
  3. Enders, A.C., Chavez, D.J., and Schlafke, S., 1981, Comparison of implantation in utero and in vitro, in “Cellular and Molecular Aspects of Implantation”, S.R. Glasser and D.W. Bullock, eds., Plenum Press, New York. pp. 365–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Findlay, J.K., Salamonsen, L.A., and Cherny, R.A. 1990, Endometrial function: studies using isolated cells in vitro, in “Oxford Reviews of Reproductive Biology” S.R. Milligan, ed., Clarendon Press, Oxford. pp. 181–223.Google Scholar
  5. Glasser, S.R., and Mulholland, J., 1992, Receptivity is a polarity dependent special function of hormonally regulated uterine epithelial cells, J. Electron Microscop. Tech 25:.106–120.Google Scholar
  6. Salamonsen, L.A., and Nancarrow, C.D., 1994, The cell biology of the oviduct and the endometrium, in “Molecular and Cellular Mechanisms in Female Reproduction”, J.K. Findlay, ed., Academic Press, New York (in press).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. K. Findlay
    • 1
  1. 1.Prince Henry’s Institute of Medical ResearchClaytonAustralia

Personalised recommendations