4.6 Article

VEGF and VEGFR1 levels in different regions of the normal and preeclampsia placentae

期刊

MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 438, 期 1-2, 页码 141-152

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11010-017-3121-y

关键词

Angiogenesis; Placenta; Preeclampsia; Sampling site; VEGF

资金

  1. Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), India
  2. Department of Science and Technology (DST), Government of India

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Altered placental angiogenesis is implicated in the pathophysiology of preeclampsia. We have earlier reported placental regional differences in oxidative stress markers and neurotrophins. Oxidative stress and neurotrophins are reported to regulate angiogenesis. This study aims to examine protein and mRNA levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and VEGF receptor 1 (VEGFR1) in four regions [central maternal (CM), central fetal (CF), peripheral maternal (PM), and peripheral fetal (PF)] of the placenta in normotensive control (NC) women (n = 51) and women with preeclampsia (PE) (n = 43) [18 delivered at term (T-PE) and 25 delivered preterm (PT-PE)]. In all groups, CF region reported highest VEGF protein levels compared to all other regions. VEGF mRNA level was higher in CF region as compared to CM region in PE group (p < 0.05). VEGF levels were lower in all regions of PE, T-PE, and PT-PE groups (p < 0.05) as compared to their respective regions in NC group. VEGFR1 levels were lower in CF (p < 0.05) and PF (p < 0.01) regions as compared to CM region only in control. However, VEGFR1 levels were higher in CF (p < 0.05) and PF (p < 0.01) regions of PT-PE group as compared to control. VEGFR1 mRNA level was higher in PM region of PE group and T-PE group (p < 0.05 for both) as compared to control. VEGF levels in the PF region were positively associated with birth weight and placental weight. This study describes placental regional changes in angiogenic factors particularly highlighting increased VEGF in CF region possibly in response to hypoxic conditions prevailing in placenta.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据