These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Evaluation of Combined p57KIP2 Immunohistochemistry and Fluorescent in situ Hybridization Analysis for Hydatidiform Moles Compared with Genotyping Diagnosis.
    Author: Usui H, Hoshimoto K, Sato A, Kano M, Fukusato T, Nakatani Y, Shozu M.
    Journal: Int J Gynecol Pathol; 2024 Sep 01; 43(5):474-486. PubMed ID: 38291567.
    Abstract:
    Immunostaining with p57KIP2 is a widely used diagnostic technique to differentiate complete hydatidiform moles (CHMs) from partial hydatidiform moles (PHM) and non-molar hydropic abortion. However, distinguishing between PHMs and non-molar hydropic abortions using histopathology alone is often challenging. This study aimed to evaluate the technical validity and additional benefits of using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in combination with p57KIP2 immunostaining to diagnose molar and non-molar conceptuses. The study involved 80 specimens, which underwent genetic diagnosis using short tandem repeat analysis, including 44 androgenetic CHMs, 20 diandric monogynic PHMs, 14 biparental non-molar hydropic abortions, 1 monoandric digynic triploid abortion, and 1 vaginal specimen of gestational trophoblastic neoplasia. Two pathologists independently diagnosed the cases based on morphology and p57KIP2 immunostaining while the clinical information was masked. FISH analysis was performed using 3 probes (CEP17, CEPX, and CEPY), which revealed that all androgenetic CHM and biparental diploid non-molar hydropic abortion specimens were diploid. Among the 20 diandric monogynic PHM cases examined by analyzing short tandem repeat polymorphisms, 18 were triploid, and the remaining 2 were diploid. These two specimens were possibly androgenetic/biparental mosaics based on FISH analysis, where the three-signal ratios counting 50 cells were clearly within the diploid ranges. Eight of the 20 genetic PHMs and 2 of the 14 genetically confirmed non-molar hydropic abortions that were falsely diagnosed based on morphology and immunohistochemistry by at least 1 pathologist were correctly diagnosed as PHM and non-molar hydropic abortion, respectively, by FISH analysis. However, 1 monoandric digynic villus was classified as triploid by FISH analysis, leading to a false PHM diagnosis. In conclusion, the combination of FISH analysis with p57KIP2 immunostaining helps in diagnosing molar and non-molar conceptuses in numerous cases; nevertheless, exceptional cases should be considered.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]