Cargando…

Uterine receptivity, embryo attachment, and embryo invasion: Multistep processes in embryo implantation

BACKGROUND: Recurrent implantation failure is a critical issue in IVF‐ET treatment. Successful embryo implantation needs appropriate molecular and cellular communications between embryo and uterus. Rodent models have been used intensively to understand these mechanisms. METHODS: The molecular and ce...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fukui, Yamato, Hirota, Yasushi, Matsuo, Mitsunori, Gebril, Mona, Akaeda, Shun, Hiraoka, Takehiro, Osuga, Yutaka
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6613011/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31312101
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmb2.12280
_version_ 1783432981483880448
author Fukui, Yamato
Hirota, Yasushi
Matsuo, Mitsunori
Gebril, Mona
Akaeda, Shun
Hiraoka, Takehiro
Osuga, Yutaka
author_facet Fukui, Yamato
Hirota, Yasushi
Matsuo, Mitsunori
Gebril, Mona
Akaeda, Shun
Hiraoka, Takehiro
Osuga, Yutaka
author_sort Fukui, Yamato
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Recurrent implantation failure is a critical issue in IVF‐ET treatment. Successful embryo implantation needs appropriate molecular and cellular communications between embryo and uterus. Rodent models have been used intensively to understand these mechanisms. METHODS: The molecular and cellular mechanisms of embryo implantation were described by referring to the previous literature investigated by us and others. The studies using mouse models of embryo implantation were mainly cited. RESULTS: Progesterone (P(4)) produced by ovarian corpus luteum provides the uterus with receptivity to the embryo, and uterine epithelial growth arrest and stromal proliferation, what we call uterine proliferation‐differentiation switching (PDS), take place in the peri‐implantation period before embryo attachment. Uterine PDS is a hallmark of uterine receptivity, and several genes such as HAND2 and BMI1, control uterine PDS by modulating P(4)‐PR signaling. As the next implantation process, embryo attachment onto the luminal epithelium occurs. This process is regulated by FOXA2‐LIF pathway and planar cell polarity signaling. Then, the luminal epithelium at the embryo attachment site detaches from the stroma, which enables trophoblast invasion. This process of embryo invasion is regulated by HIF2α in the stroma. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that embryo implantation contains multistep processes regulated by specific molecular pathways.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6613011
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66130112019-07-16 Uterine receptivity, embryo attachment, and embryo invasion: Multistep processes in embryo implantation Fukui, Yamato Hirota, Yasushi Matsuo, Mitsunori Gebril, Mona Akaeda, Shun Hiraoka, Takehiro Osuga, Yutaka Reprod Med Biol Mini Reviews BACKGROUND: Recurrent implantation failure is a critical issue in IVF‐ET treatment. Successful embryo implantation needs appropriate molecular and cellular communications between embryo and uterus. Rodent models have been used intensively to understand these mechanisms. METHODS: The molecular and cellular mechanisms of embryo implantation were described by referring to the previous literature investigated by us and others. The studies using mouse models of embryo implantation were mainly cited. RESULTS: Progesterone (P(4)) produced by ovarian corpus luteum provides the uterus with receptivity to the embryo, and uterine epithelial growth arrest and stromal proliferation, what we call uterine proliferation‐differentiation switching (PDS), take place in the peri‐implantation period before embryo attachment. Uterine PDS is a hallmark of uterine receptivity, and several genes such as HAND2 and BMI1, control uterine PDS by modulating P(4)‐PR signaling. As the next implantation process, embryo attachment onto the luminal epithelium occurs. This process is regulated by FOXA2‐LIF pathway and planar cell polarity signaling. Then, the luminal epithelium at the embryo attachment site detaches from the stroma, which enables trophoblast invasion. This process of embryo invasion is regulated by HIF2α in the stroma. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that embryo implantation contains multistep processes regulated by specific molecular pathways. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-05-24 /pmc/articles/PMC6613011/ /pubmed/31312101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmb2.12280 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Reproductive Medicine and Biology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japan Society for Reproductive Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Mini Reviews
Fukui, Yamato
Hirota, Yasushi
Matsuo, Mitsunori
Gebril, Mona
Akaeda, Shun
Hiraoka, Takehiro
Osuga, Yutaka
Uterine receptivity, embryo attachment, and embryo invasion: Multistep processes in embryo implantation
title Uterine receptivity, embryo attachment, and embryo invasion: Multistep processes in embryo implantation
title_full Uterine receptivity, embryo attachment, and embryo invasion: Multistep processes in embryo implantation
title_fullStr Uterine receptivity, embryo attachment, and embryo invasion: Multistep processes in embryo implantation
title_full_unstemmed Uterine receptivity, embryo attachment, and embryo invasion: Multistep processes in embryo implantation
title_short Uterine receptivity, embryo attachment, and embryo invasion: Multistep processes in embryo implantation
title_sort uterine receptivity, embryo attachment, and embryo invasion: multistep processes in embryo implantation
topic Mini Reviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6613011/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31312101
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmb2.12280
work_keys_str_mv AT fukuiyamato uterinereceptivityembryoattachmentandembryoinvasionmultistepprocessesinembryoimplantation
AT hirotayasushi uterinereceptivityembryoattachmentandembryoinvasionmultistepprocessesinembryoimplantation
AT matsuomitsunori uterinereceptivityembryoattachmentandembryoinvasionmultistepprocessesinembryoimplantation
AT gebrilmona uterinereceptivityembryoattachmentandembryoinvasionmultistepprocessesinembryoimplantation
AT akaedashun uterinereceptivityembryoattachmentandembryoinvasionmultistepprocessesinembryoimplantation
AT hiraokatakehiro uterinereceptivityembryoattachmentandembryoinvasionmultistepprocessesinembryoimplantation
AT osugayutaka uterinereceptivityembryoattachmentandembryoinvasionmultistepprocessesinembryoimplantation