ReviewPathologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026
[Pathoanatomical investigation of early pregnancy loss : Diagnostic possibilities and limitations].
Review in Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Curettages of early pregnancy losses (EPLs) are frequently sent specimens for pathologic anatomic investigation, because about 15% of the clinically diagnosed pregnancies result in a miscarriage. According to recently published German recommendations, every early miscarriage should be investigated morphologically. In a careful macroscopic preparation, the different compartments (decidua, villous tissue, and possibly embryo/fetus) should be identified and submitted for histologic diagnosis. The most important issues for the microscopic investigation are documentation of an intrauterine pregnancy (to rule out extrauterine gravidity), screening for gestational trophoblastic disease, and-if possible-detection of pathologic anatomic visible causal factors for early pregnancy loss. In some instances, especially in the case of repeated spontaneous miscarriage in the first trimester, the supplement of conventional cytogenetic analysis and molecular genetic and molecular pathologic methods may be useful for confirmation of a diagnosis. A standardized procedure for asservation of native trophoblastic tissue should be established in the department. The detection of early complete hydatidiform mole and partial hydatidiform mole is important, since these lesions have a risk for the subsequent development of persisting gestational trophoblastic disease. Histologic characters of sporadic chromosomal aberrations (the most frequent etiology of EPLs) in miscarriage specimens are abnormalities of the villous tissue (trophoblast, stroma, and vessels).Chronic histiocytic intervillositis (CHI), massive perivillous fibrin deposition (MFD), and chronic deciduitis are morphologically defined lesions with partly high recurrence risk. These placental diseases can be causal factors for clinical habitual miscarriage.Although the limitations of the morphologic diagnostic procedure have to be recognized, the standardized pathologic anatomic investigation of miscarriage specimens can render information on the etiology and recurrence risk in some cases of early pregnancy loss.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41524957What 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.