...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Placenta >Shifting concepts of the fetal-maternal interface: a historical perspective.
【24h】

Shifting concepts of the fetal-maternal interface: a historical perspective.

机译：胎儿-母亲界面的转变观念：历史的视角。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The first microscopic images of the human placenta, obtained in the 1830s, revealed the presence of an epithelial lining separating fetal capillaries from maternal blood, which was in later years successively interpreted as maternal endothelial, decidual and finally as "trophoblastic". With this new term, introduced by Hubrecht in 1889, its embryonic/fetal origin was recognized as well as its role in nutrient uptake from maternal blood. Thomas Huxley considered the presence of a decidua as an important feature for mammalian classification, but still mixed up maternal and trophoblastic tissue. Mathias Duval recognized invasive activities by trophoblast in rodents, but over-interpreted the arterial invasion observed in rats. In the human, unusual endovascular cells were first described by Carl Friedlander, but their trophoblastic nature was only recognized in the early 20th century. Nitabuch's description of a continuous fibrinoid layer underneath the basal plate led to the erroneous concept of a borderline separating the trophoblast-invaded upper decidua from the deeper non-invaded uterine tissue. This concept - based on the study of one pregnant uterus - has been made obsolete by later studies of trophoblast invasion. Many erroneous interpretations of placental histology in the past were logical in the context of then current knowledge. A better understanding depended on improved technology which allowed tracing of histological continuity of structural features in space and time. Although identification of cell types increasingly relies on molecular markers, classical histological principles should still be applied in conjunction with newer techniques in order to arrive at a broad understanding of placental development. Understanding past errors in interpreting placental histology should guard us against overconfidence in so-called breakthrough discoveries.
机译：1830年代获得的人类胎盘的第一张显微图像显示，存在上皮衬层，将胎儿毛细血管从母体血液中分离出来，在后来的几年中被相继解释为母体内皮，蜕膜，最后被解释为“滋养层”。在1889年由Hubrecht引入这个新名词后，它的胚胎/胎儿起源以及其在从母体血液吸收营养中的作用就得到了认可。托马斯·赫x黎（Thomas Huxley）认为蜕膜的存在是哺乳动物分类的重要特征，但仍然混合了母体和滋养层组织。 Mathias Duval认识到了滋养细胞对啮齿动物的侵袭活动，但过度解释了在大鼠中观察到的动脉侵袭。在人类中，Carl Friedlander首先描述了异常的血管内细胞，但其滋养细胞的性质仅在20世纪初才被认识到。尼塔布奇（Nitabuch）对基底板下方连续的纤维蛋白层的描述导致了界线的错误概念，该界线将滋养层侵袭的上蜕膜与较深的非侵袭性子宫组织分开。这一概念-基于对一个怀孕子宫的研究-已被后来对滋养细胞侵袭的研究所淘汰。过去对胎盘组织学的许多错误解释在当时的知识背景下都是合乎逻辑的。对更好的理解取决于改进的技术，该技术可以追踪时空结构特征的组织学连续性。尽管细胞类型的鉴定越来越依赖于分子标记物，但经典的组织学原理仍应与较新的技术结合使用，以便对胎盘发育有广泛的了解。了解过去在解释胎盘组织学上的错误应该使我们避免对所谓的突破性发现过于自信。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号