Establishment of a new diagnostic method for hydropic villi by using TSSC3 antibody

Auxiliary and experimental diagnostic techniques for hydatidiform moles

Hydatidiform moles are classified into complete hydatidiform moles (CHMs), which are androgenetic and diploid, and partial hydatidiform moles (PHM), which are triploid with two paternal chromosomes and one maternal chromosome. The incidence of gestational trophoblastic neoplasia differs substantially between CHM and PHM. However, they are occasionally difficult to diagnose. In this review, auxiliary and experimental methods based on cytogenetic features and advanced molecular detection techniques applied to the diagnosis and analysis of hydatidiform moles are summarized, including basic principles, characteristics, and clinical implications. Short tandem repeat polymorphism analysis is considered the gold standard for the genetic diagnosis of hydatidiform moles. In clinical settings, immunohistochemical analyses of p57^KIP2 , an imprinted gene product, are widely used to differentiate CHMs from other conceptuses, including PHMs. Recently, new molecular genetic techniques, such as single nucleotide polymorphism arrays, have been applied to research on hydatidiform moles. In addition to insights from classical methods, such as chromosome analysis, recently developed approaches have yielded novel findings related to the mechanism underlying the development of androgenetic CHMs.

Challenges in diagnosing hydatidiform moles: a review of promising molecular biomarkers

INTRODUCTION

Hydatidiform moles (HMs) are pathologic conceptions with unique genetic bases and abnormal placental villous tissue. Overlapping ultrasonographical and histological manifestations of molar and non-molar (NM) gestations and HMs subtypes makes accurate diagnosis challenging. Currently, immunohistochemical analysis of p57 and molecular genotyping have greatly improved the diagnostic accuracy.

AREAS COVERED

The differential expression of molecular biomarkers may be valuable for distinguishing among the subtypes of HMs and their mimics. Thus, biomarkers may be the key to refining HMs diagnosis. In this review, we summarize the current challenges in diagnosing HMs, and provide a critical overview of the recent literature about potential diagnostic biomarkers and their subclassifications. An online search on PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases was conducted from the inception to 1 April 2022.

EXPERT OPINION

the emerging biomarkers offer new possibilities to refine the diagnosis for HMs and pregnancy loss. Although the additional studies are required to be quantified and investigated in clinical trials to verify their diagnostic utility. It is important to explore, validate, and facilitate the wide adoption of newly developed biomarkers in the coming years.