II. Hydatidiform Mole in Southern Iran: A Statistical Survey of 113 Cases

Javey, Houshang; Sajadi, Hassan

doi:10.1002/j.1879-3479.1977.tb00716.x

Cited by 20 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…En effet, l'incidence de la môle hydatiforme est très éle-vée en Sud-Est asiatique, puisque la fréquence de la môle hydatiforme varie entre 3,2 à 9,9 par 1000 grossesses dans ces régions [5,[11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29]. Elle est élevée en Amérique Latine et en moyen orient où cette fréquence varie de 1 à 2 par 1000 grossesses [5,[16][17][18]23]. Cette pathologie est un peu moins retrouvée en Amérique central et du Sud, voire plus rare en Europe et en Amérique du Nord où elle est de 0,5 à 1 par 1000 grossesses [5,[13][14][15]17,18,30,31].…”

Section: éPidémiologieunclassified

Les môles hydatiformes complètes au Maroc : étude épidémiologique et clinique

Boufettal

Coullin

Mahdaoui

et al. 2011

Journal de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Biologie de la Reproducti

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: éPidémiologieunclassified

Les môles hydatiformes complètes au Maroc : étude épidémiologique et clinique

Boufettal

Coullin

Mahdaoui

et al. 2011

Journal de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Biologie de la Reproducti

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…5 The reported incidence in Yemen is 1 in 164 pregnancies, 6 1 in 318 in Iraq, 7 and 1 in 314 pregnancies in Iran. 8 The prevalence of hydatidiform mole in Brazil is 2.2%, South Africa 1.2 per 1000 deliveries and Nnewi, Southeast Nigeria is 0.3 per 1000 deliveries. 9…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gestational Trophoblastic Disease at Sultan Qaboos University Hospital: Prevalence, Risk Factors, Histological Features, Sonographic Findings, and Outcomes

Riyami

Hajri

et al. 2019

OMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives We sought to assess the prevalence of gestational trophoblastic diseases (GTD) among pregnant women at Sultan Qaboos University Hospital (SQUH) and compare our results with the international studies. We also sought to determine the risk factors, histological features, sonographic findings, and outcomes in women with GTD. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all women diagnosed with GTD and followed at SQUH between November 2007 and October 2015. We collected data on maternal demographics, risk factors, sonographic features, histological diagnosis, follow-up period, and chemotherapy treatment from the hospital information system. Results Sixty-four women with GTD were included in the study with a mean age of 31.0±7.5 years, mean gravidity 4.0, and parity 2.0. The prevalence of GTD was 0.3% (one in 386 births), and the most common risk factors were increased maternal age and multiparity. A partial hydatidiform mole was diagnosed in 54.7%, complete hydatidiform mole in 43.8%, and invasive mole in 1.6% of women. Eleven percent of women required chemotherapy. Typical ultrasound features for partial molar pregnancy were present in 54.7% of our sample, while snowstorm appearance was seen in 89.3% of those with complete mole. Negative beta-human chorionic gonadotropin was achieved 70 days after diagnosis in 41 women. Conclusions The awareness of the risks and complications of GTD among physicians with close follow-up is paramount. There is a need to establish a national registry of GTD cases in Oman.

show abstract

“…This may not invalidate the general conclusions that the disease is far more common in the East than in the West but it may obscure the search for aetiological factors such as the relation of environmental, genetic and chromosomal factors. Javey and Sajadi (1978) have discussed the variations in the prevalence of hydatidiform mole in Iran in relation to nutritional standards and dietary habits but, as shown here, part of the apparent variation may be due to differences in diagnostic criteria. Further, if in a therapeutic trial patients with abnormal conceptuses are included with those having hydatidiform moles the clinical significance of the test will be biased.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Discrepancies in the Histological Diagnosis of Hydatidiform Mole

Javey¹,

Borazjani²,

Behmard

et al. 1979

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sections of tissue from 256 patients on which a histological diagnosis of hydatidiform mole had been made were reviewed by a visiting pathologist. There was agreement between the reporting pathologists and the visiting pathologist in only 55.1 per cent of cases, a less severe diagnosis was made by the visiting pathologist in 42-2 per cent of cases. The disagreement was as high as 66.6 per cent with pathologists who rarely worked in the gynaecological field. This study casts serious doubt on the consistency of the histological diagnosis of hydatidiform mole made in any one laboratory and between different laboratories. It is suggested that in epidemiological studies the diagnosis should be made by a panel of pathologists using strict histological criteria and in an individual laboratory diagnosis should be made or confirmed by a pathologist experienced in gynaecological pathology.

show abstract

II. Hydatidiform Mole in Southern Iran: A Statistical Survey of 113 Cases

Cited by 20 publications

References 11 publications

Les môles hydatiformes complètes au Maroc : étude épidémiologique et clinique

Les môles hydatiformes complètes au Maroc : étude épidémiologique et clinique

Gestational Trophoblastic Disease at Sultan Qaboos University Hospital: Prevalence, Risk Factors, Histological Features, Sonographic Findings, and Outcomes

Discrepancies in the Histological Diagnosis of Hydatidiform Mole

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About