The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Hydrosalpinges adversely affect markers of endometrial receptivity
Open accessAbstract
While in-vitro fertilization (IVF) was initially developed in women with tubal factor infertility, recent clinical studies have suggested that the presence of hydrosalpinges lowers implantation and pregnancy rates. We postulated that these hydrosalpinges cause impaired endometrial receptivity. A total of 103 women with hydrosalpinges were prospectively evaluated, and compared with 55 infertile and 44 fertile controls. All women had endometrial biopsies during the window of implantation, analysed by conventional histological criteria, and also stained for three integrin markers of endometrial receptivity (alpha1beta1, alpha4beta1 and alpha vbeta3). Women with hydrosalpinges (cases) expressed significantly less of the alpha vbeta3 integrin compared with controls. There was no difference in expression of alpha1beta1 or alpha4beta1 among groups. A significantly greater number of cases had out of phase histology and missing alpha vbeta3 (type I defects) and absent integrin expression despite normal histological maturation (type II) defects, compared with controls. Of 20 women with impaired endometrial receptivity who were also biopsied after hydrosalpinx surgery, 70% demonstrated increased alpha vbeta3 expression. Seventy-seven percent of type I and 57% of type II defects were corrected postoperatively. Using markers of endometrial receptivity, this study demonstrates that inflammatory hydrosalpinges have an adverse effect on endometrial receptivity, which in some cases may be overcome by surgical treatment of the hydrosalpinx.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Endometrial receptivity markers, the journey to successful embryo implantation.
Achache, H., & Revel, A. (2006) · Human Reproduction Update · doi:10.1093/humupd/dml004 · Cited by 952
Pathogenic mechanisms in endometriosis-associated infertility
Gupta, S., Goldberg, J. M., Aziz, N., Goldberg, E., Krajcir, N., & Agarwal, A. (2008) · Fertility and Sterility · doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.02.093 · Cited by 409
Molecular classification of endometriosis and disease stage using high-dimensional genomic data
Tamaresis, J. S., Irwin, J. C., Goldfien, G. A., Rabban, J. T., Burney, R. O., Nezhat, C., DePaolo, L. V., & Giudice, L. C. (2014) · Endocrinology · doi:10.1210/en.2014-1490 · Cited by 168
Regulation of HOXA-10 and its expression in normal and abnormal endometrium
Gui, Y., Zhang, J., Yuan, L., & Lessey, B. A. (1999) · MHR: Basic science of reproductive medicine · doi:10.1093/molehr/5.9.866 · Cited by 139
Self-citationHydrosalpinx fluid diminishes endometrial cell HOXA10 expression
Daftary, G. S., & Taylor, H. S. (2002) · Fertility and Sterility · doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(02)03306-x · Cited by 78
Metadata
- Authors
- Meyer, W. R., Castelbaum, A. J., Somkuti, S., Sagoskin, A. W., Doyle, M., Harris, J. E., & Lessey, B. A.
- Venue
- Human Reproduction
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1997-07-01
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1393-1398
- ISSN
- 0268-1161 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2350
- OpenAlex
- W2119256066
- Cited by
- 280
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hydrosalpinges adversely affect markers of endometrial receptivity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/humrep/12.7.1393
- The paper
- Meyer, W. R., Castelbaum, A. J., Somkuti, S., Sagoskin, A. W., Doyle, M., Harris, J. E., & Lessey, B. A. (1997). Hydrosalpinges adversely affect markers of endometrial receptivity. Human Reproduction. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/12.7.1393
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.