Molecular cytogenetic analysis of a hydatidiform mole with coexistent fetus: a case report.

BACKGROUND: A hydatidiform mole with a coexisting fetus is a rare condition that commonly occurs as either a partial mole with fetus or a twin pregnancy comprising a complete mole and normal fetus. In the former case, the fetus is triploid, and in the latter case, the fetus is diploid with different alleles from those of the mole. Because there is a difference in the persistent trophoblastic disease incidence between the two, an accurate diagnosis is required. CASE PRESENTATION: We present a case of a 34-year-old Japanese woman who was pregnant with a hydatidiform mole and two coexisting fetuses. At 17 weeks of gestation, hemorrhage-induced progressive anemia in the mother prompted the decision to terminate the pregnancy, after which no complications occurred. Molecular cytogenetic analysis revealed that one of the fetuses was a normal diploid fetus with the same allele in the fetus and placenta. The hydatidiform mole was revealed to be a mosaic of two diploids, and the other coexisting fetus was a normal diploid that shared one of the mole alleles. CONCLUSIONS: This was presumed to be a rare case of twin pregnancy by triploid embryo formation, followed by loss of an allele due to postzygotic diploidization, development of a diploid fetus, and development of another fetus from a separate embryo. Because of the existence of cases such as this one with a diploid fetus, but without a normal pregnancy coexistent with a complete hydatidiform mole, diagnosis by genetic analysis is required for prognosis.

Efficacy and safety of cell-free and concentrated ascites reinfusion therapy (CART) in gynecologic cancer patients with a large volume of ascites.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cell-free concentrated ascites reinfusion therapy (CART) on a large amount of ascites. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty-eight CART procedures were performed in nine patients with ovarian, endometrial, or cervical cancer from February 2013 to September 2014. The medical records were retrospectively reviewed for the amount of collected ascites, vital signs, and laboratory results before and after CART. RESULTS: No obvious change in the plasma protein and plasma albumin concentration was found after CART for < 5 L of ascites; however, obvious increases in both were observed in CART for ≥ 5 L of ascites (P < 0.001). The optimum cut-off value for obtaining a positive variant of plasma protein and plasma albumin after CART was 7.9 L. CART for ≥ 5 L of ascites did not increase the risk of transient water retention in the body (odds ratio = 2.2; 95% confidence interval: 0.35-13.83; P = 0.38); however, CART for ≥ 7.9 L of ascites increased the risk of water retention (odds ratio = 8.4; 95% confidence interval: 1.91-44.09; P = 0.004). The optimal cut-off value of ascites for predicting water retention due to CART was 9.2 L. CONCLUSION: Massive ascites collection in CART < 9.2 L appears to be a safe and effective treatment for improving general condition, plasma protein, and electrolytes in gynecologic cancer patients.