File:Meyer1920 fig21.jpg: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 07:22, 24 April 2012

Figure 21.

The general appearance of the whole chorionic vesicle sometimes is an aid in gross identification, for the villi not infrequently are smooth, slightly branched, and unusually long, so that the vesicle looks shaggy, as illustrated in figure 21.

The typical gross, hydatid or watery, translucent nature of the villi can not be relied upon in early stages, for normally shaped villi, which have undergone considerable lysis, may be almost transparent and also somewhat more than normally bulbous. However, save in the case of some specimens of tubal pregnancy, the swelling of the villi, due to maceration or to luetic changes, is quite different in character from that characteristic of hydatiform degeneration, and usually quite easily distinguishable from it. Judging from several specimens of villi which were macerated in distilled water during a period of weeks, post partum maceration never could cause confusion and the same thing undoubtedly is true of intra-uterine maceration.

Since numerous trophoblastic nodules are present also in other conditions, notably in retained placentae as found by Aschoff and others. I have not been able to regard their presence in unusual numbers, in some cases of hydatiform degeneration, as of crucial value, but the absence of placental differentiation at a time when it should be present, with a uniform and unusual development of the villi over the whole exterior of relatively large chorionic vesicles, is decidedly significant and has often been found to imply the presence of hydatiform degeneration. The same thing is true of a very irregular distribution of the villi, or of uniformly distributed fusiform enlargements on the villi and of the loss of the dull appearance of their cut surfaces, as seen under the binocular. As soon as the stroma becomes hydatiform, and even before liquefaction is present, the cut surfaces of hydatiform villi look somewhat shiny and waxy or, perhaps better still, parafiine-like, as in the specimen in situ shown in figure 21. A bluish tinge always is present, and this appearance is very characteristic. However, how easily a specimen of hydatiform mole can be recognized by examination with the binocular alone necessarily will depend also upon the condition of the specimen. If the villi are matted, glued, or macerated, not only the early hydatiform changes but even fairly advanced ones often are masked so completely that recognition is difficult or impossibie without histologic examination.

Plate 4: Fig. 21 | Fig. 22 | Fig. 23 | Fig. 24 | Fig. 25 | Fig. 26 | Fig. 27

Historic Disclaimer - information about historic embryology pages
Pages where the terms "Historic" (textbooks, papers, people, recommendations) appear on this site, and sections within pages where this disclaimer appears, indicate that the content and scientific understanding are specific to the time of publication. This means that while some scientific descriptions are still accurate, the terminology and interpretation of the developmental mechanisms reflect the understanding at the time of original publication and those of the preceding periods, these terms, interpretations and recommendations may not reflect our current scientific understanding. (More? Embryology History \| Historic Embryology Papers)

Reference

Meyer AW. Hydatiform degeneration in tubal and uterine pregnancy. (1920) Carnegie Instn. Wash. Publ., Contrib. Embryol., 40: 327- 364.

Cite this page: Hill, M.A. (2024, April 26) Embryology Meyer1920 fig21.jpg. Retrieved from https://embryology.med.unsw.edu.au/embryology/index.php/File:Meyer1920_fig21.jpg

What Links Here?

File history

Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.

	Date/Time	Thumbnail	Dimensions	User	Comment
current	13:05, 8 April 2012		800 × 553 (85 KB)	Z8600021 (talk \| contribs)	==Figure 21.== Plate 4: Fig. 21 \| Fig. 22 \| Fig. 23 \| Fig. 24 \| Fig. 25

You cannot overwrite this file.

File usage

The following page uses this file:

Book - Contributions to Embryology Carnegie Institution No.40

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==Figure 21.==
+The general appearance of the whole chorionic vesicle sometimes is an aid in gross identification, for the villi not infrequently are smooth, slightly branched, and unusually long, so that the vesicle looks shaggy, as illustrated in figure 21.
+The typical gross, hydatid or watery, translucent nature of the villi can not be relied upon in early stages, for normally shaped villi, which have undergone considerable lysis, may be almost transparent and also somewhat more than normally bulbous. However, save in the case of some specimens of tubal pregnancy, the swelling of the villi, due to maceration or to luetic changes, is quite different in character from that characteristic of hydatiform degeneration, and usually quite easily distinguishable from it. Judging from several specimens of villi which were macerated in distilled water during a period of weeks, post partum maceration never could cause confusion and the same thing undoubtedly is true of intra-uterine maceration.
+Since numerous trophoblastic nodules are present also in other conditions, notably in retained placentae as found by Aschoff and others. I have not been able to regard their presence in unusual numbers, in some cases of hydatiform degeneration, as of crucial value, but the absence of placental differentiation at a time when it should be present, with a uniform and unusual development of the villi over the whole exterior of relatively large chorionic vesicles, is decidedly significant and has often been found to imply the presence of hydatiform degeneration. The same thing is true of a very irregular distribution of the villi, or of uniformly distributed fusiform enlargements on the villi and of the loss of the dull appearance of their cut surfaces, as seen under the binocular. As soon as the stroma becomes hydatiform, and even before liquefaction is present, the cut surfaces of hydatiform villi look somewhat shiny and waxy or, perhaps better still, parafiine-like, as in the specimen in situ shown in figure 21. A bluish tinge always is present, and this appearance is very characteristic. However, how easily a specimen of hydatiform mole can be recognized by examination with the binocular alone necessarily will depend also upon the condition of the specimen. If the villi are matted, glued, or macerated, not only the early hydatiform changes but even fairly advanced ones often are masked so completely that recognition is difficult or impossibie without histologic examination.
 [[:File:Meyer1920_Plate_4.jpg|Plate 4]]: [[:File:Meyer1920_fig21.jpg|Fig. 21]] | [[:File:Meyer1920_fig22.jpg|Fig. 22]] | [[:File:Meyer1920_fig23.jpg|Fig. 23]] | [[:File:Meyer1920_fig24.jpg|Fig. 24]] | [[:File:Meyer1920_fig25.jpg|Fig. 25]] | [[:File:Meyer1920_fig26.jpg|Fig. 26]] | [[:File:Meyer1920_fig27.jpg|Fig. 27]]