Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41000072›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in cell and developmental biology2025

Three-dimensional microarchitecture of the human placental villous tree in health and disease.

Nirav Barapatre, Hans-Georg Frank

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in cell and developmental biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Nirav BarapatreDepartment of Anatomy II, Anatomische Anstalt, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Hans-Georg FrankDepartment of Anatomy II, Anatomische Anstalt, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Placental dysfunction plays a central role in pregnancy complications such as fetal growth restriction (FGR), preeclampsia (PE), and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Recent advances in 3D microscopy and stereological analysis have revealed microanatomical changes not detectable by conventional histology. Objective: To summarise key morphological and cellular alterations in the human placenta across FGR, PE, and GDM, with a focus on architecture of the villous tree, proliferative trophoblast dynamics, and sex-specific adaptations. Methods: A synthesis of quantitative 3D histological studies was undertaken, focusing on villous compartment volumes, trophoblast proliferation markers (PCNA), nuclear distribution patterns, and branching indices in placentas from affected and control pregnancies. Results: FGR placentas exhibit central loss of contractile villi (C-villi), increased syncytial nuclear density, and abolished sexual dimorphism. In PE, peripheral villous volume (NC-villi) is reduced, with marked increased proliferation of trophoblast in female placentas and disrupted nuclear spacing. GDM placentas show a global reduction in villous branching and altered proliferative dynamics of villous trophoblast, particularly in females, already in the absence of placental macrosomia. Conclusion: Despite distinct clinical profiles, FGR, PE, and GDM exhibit specific yet partially overlapping placental microstructural pathologies, characterised by trophoblast dysregulation and sex-specific adaptations. These findings underscore the significance of fetal sex and quantitative three-dimensional morphometry in advancing our understanding of placental disease mechanisms.

Indexed as

3D microscopic imagingFGRGDMplacentapreeclampisastereological analysestrophoblastvillous tree

Identifiers

PMID41000072
PMCPMC12457310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.