The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
1996
DOI: 10.1016/0028-2243(95)02298-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Paracrine mechanism of ovarian regulation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
0
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 30 publications
0
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This observation can support the hypothesis that follicular depletion is one of the mechanisms contributing to the development of POF or is a sequel of this condition (17). In contrast, we observed that the numbers of primordial, primary, and secondary follicles in patients with chronic anovulation were higher than in the other groups; this is likely explained by the ovarian neuroendocrine and paracrine imbalances described in patients with chronic anovulation, in which oocyte growth and development are altered, resulting in an increased number of stimulated ovarian follicles (18). The number of antral and atretic follicles in all the four groups was not statistically different.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 61%
“…This observation can support the hypothesis that follicular depletion is one of the mechanisms contributing to the development of POF or is a sequel of this condition (17). In contrast, we observed that the numbers of primordial, primary, and secondary follicles in patients with chronic anovulation were higher than in the other groups; this is likely explained by the ovarian neuroendocrine and paracrine imbalances described in patients with chronic anovulation, in which oocyte growth and development are altered, resulting in an increased number of stimulated ovarian follicles (18). The number of antral and atretic follicles in all the four groups was not statistically different.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 61%