ArticleAdvanced biomedical research2017
Evaluation of Progesterone and Ovulation-stimulating Drugs on the Glandular Epithelium and Angiogenesis in Mice.
Article in Advanced biomedical research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Three-Dimensional Visualization of Mouse Endometrial Remodeling After Superovulation.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Article
- Solving the Puzzle: What Is the Role of Progestogens in Neovascularization?Biomolecules · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHuman endometrium is a dynamic tissue during the menstrual cycle can be influenced by ovarian hormones. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the endometrium angiogenesis under the influence of human menopausal gonadotropin and human chorionic gonadotropin (HMG and HCG) that stimulate ovulation and progesterone. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this study, thirty adult female mice were randomly divided into three groups as: control, gonadotropin and gonadotropin + progesterone. The mice in the other two groups except the control group received 7.5 IU HMG and later HCG. Subsequently, the mice were placed in a cage for mating. Gonadotropin + progesterone group was administered, 1 mg/mouse progesterone in 24, 48, and 72 h interval, after HMG injection. Ninety-six hours after HMG injection, animals were sacrificed, and their uterine specimens were prepared by immunohistochemistry technique for light microscopic studies, and statistical analysis was carried out.
resultsEndometrium angiogenesis in control group showed that mean ± standard deviation was 24.15 ± 11.15, gonadotropin group was 62.50 ± 24.16, and gonadotropin + progesterone group was 41.85 ± 19.54. Significant difference between the control group and gonadotropin group and between the control group and gonadotropin + progesterone was observed. Statistically significant differences were observed in all groups in the endometrial angiogenesis (
conclusionOvarian induction with gonadotropins and gonadotropins + progesterone could not change the morphometrically index of endometrial glandular epithelium in mice. Ovarian stimulation followed by progesterone injection could modify the angiogenesis of mice endometrium.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.