Refine
Year of publication
- 2019 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Asphyxia (1)
- Cesarean section (1)
- Labor and delivery (1)
- Legs (1)
- Morbidity (1)
- Neonates (1)
- Pregnancy (1)
- Umbilical cord (1)
- adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (1)
- differentiation (1)
Institute
- Medizin (2)
Adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ASCs) are considered to be a useful tool for regenerative medicine, owing to their capabilities in differentiation, self-renewal, and immunomodulation. These cells have become a focus in the clinical setting due to their abundance and easy isolation. However, ASCs from different depots are not well characterized. Here, we analyzed the functional similarities and differences of subcutaneous and visceral ASCs. Subcutaneous ASCs have an extraordinarily directed mode of motility and a highly dynamic focal adhesion turnover, even though they share similar surface markers, whereas visceral ASCs move in an undirected random pattern with more stable focal adhesions. Visceral ASCs have a higher potential to differentiate into adipogenic and osteogenic cells when compared to subcutaneous ASCs. In line with these observations, visceral ASCs demonstrate a more active sonic hedgehog pathway that is linked to a high expression of cilia/differentiation related genes. Moreover, visceral ASCs secrete higher levels of inflammatory cytokines interleukin-6, interleukin-8, and tumor necrosis factor α relative to subcutaneous ASCs. These findings highlight, that both ASC subpopulations share multiple cellular features, but significantly differ in their functions. The functional diversity of ASCs depends on their origin, cellular context and surrounding microenvironment within adipose tissues. The data provide important insight into the biology of ASCs, which might be useful in choosing the adequate ASC subpopulation for regenerative therapies.
Introduction: Vaginal delivery out of a breech presentation in pregnancies at term are being re-implemented into clinical practice. Still, recommendations regarding exclusion criteria leading to caesarean sections are based on expert opinions, not on evidence-based guidelines. The difference in perinatal outcome and course of delivery in births with babies in frank breech position and babies in incomplete or complete breech presentation never has been investigated in a large patient cohort.
Objective: To compare perinatal outcome of vaginally intended breech deliveries between births out of frank breech position and incomplete/complete breech presentation.
Design: Prospective cohort study.
Sample: 884 women at term with a singleton in frank breech presentation (FB) and 284 women with incomplete or complete breech presentation (CB) intending vaginal birth between January 2004 and December 2018.
Methods: Maternal and fetal outcome was compared between groups using Pearson’s Chi Square test. Birth duration parameters were analysed using logistic regression.
Results: There were no differences in cesarean section rates (FB: 25.1%, CB 22.2%, p = 0.317). Short-term fetal morbidity did not differ between groups (FB: 2.5%, CB: 2.8%, p = 0.761). In vaginal deliveries the necessity to perform manual assistance was significantly more frequent in deliveries of infants in CB (FB: 39.9%, CB: 51.6%, p = 0.0013). Cord loops (FB: 10.1%, CB: 18.0%, p = 0.0004) and cesarean sections necessary because of cord prolapses (FB: 1.4%, CB 8.1%, p = 0.005) were significantly more often in deliveries with babies in CB.
Conclusion: This study provides evidence, that perinatal morbidity is not associated with the fetal leg posture in vaginally intended breech deliveries. The higher risk for the need of manual assistance during vaginal birth in deliveries of babies out of complete or incomplete breech presentation suggests that obstetrical departments re-implementing the vaginal breech in their repertoire might start with births of babies out of frank breech presentation.