title: Uterine lavage is efficient to recover endometrial cytology sample and does not interfere with fertility rate after artificial insemination in cows.
abstract: Productivity rates directly depend on the fertility of a herd, which in turn can be influenced by many factors. Semen deposited in the female reproductive tract is foreign to the body and, in response to this invasion, produces an inflammatory reaction, which is characterized by rapid infusion of polymorphonuclear (PMN) cells. Techniques to obtain an endometrial sample are usually invasive and can mask the true inflammatory response. Ultrasound is a noninvasive technique and can contribute to the diagnosis of postartificial insemination (AI) inflammatory response in cattle. The present study was divided into two experiments. The aim of experiment 1 was to compare two methods of endometrial cytology collection, uterine cytobrush (UC) and uterine lavage (UL), and their effects on uterine hemodynamics that provide information about blood flow. The two methods were evaluated by Doppler ultrasound using the spectral and color modes. For that purpose, 19 Nellore cows were synchronized for timed AI and subjected to UC (n = 9) or UL (n = 10). The techniques were performed 4 hours after AI. The results showed that both techniques allow collection of a good quality sample and with enough PMN cells to perform counting. More PMN cells were obtained by UL than UC. There was no difference in uterine blood flow between the UC and UL groups in any of the periods evaluated (34 hours before and 4, 24, and 48 hours after collection of uterine sample). On the basis of results of experiment 1, the effect of UL on fertility was studied in experiment 2. A total of 128 Nellore cows were synchronized for TAI; 35 cows were subjected to endometrial cytology by UL 4 hours after AI, and 93 were not submitted to any procedure (control). Pregnancy diagnosis was performed by transrectal ultrasound 30 days after AI. Pregnancy rates did not differ between UL (54.29%) and control (56.99%) groups. The results of this study showed that UL allows the collection of more representative cells of the surface of the uterus than UC technique and causes no damage to the reproductive tract. Moreover, UL did not affect pregnancy rate when performed 4 hours after AI.
authors: Department of Animal Reproduction, Laboratory of Teaching and Research in Pathology of Reproduction, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo, Pirassununga, São Paulo, Brazil.
authors: Helder Esteves
authors: HE
authors: Thomé
authors: Department of Animal Reproduction, Laboratory of Semen Biotechnology and Andrology, Center of Biotechnology in Animal Reproduction, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of Sao Paulo, Pirassununga, São Paulo, Brazil.
authors: Rubens Paes
authors: RP
authors: de Arruda
authors: Department of Animal Reproduction, Laboratory of Teaching and Research in Pathology of Reproduction, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo, Pirassununga, São Paulo, Brazil.
authors: Bruna Marcele Martins
authors: BMM
authors: de Oliveira
authors: Department of Animal Reproduction, Laboratory of Teaching and Research in Pathology of Reproduction, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo, Pirassununga, São Paulo, Brazil.
authors: Milton
authors: M
authors: Maturana Filho
authors: Department of Animal Reproduction, Laboratory of Teaching and Research in Pathology of Reproduction, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo, Pirassununga, São Paulo, Brazil.
authors: Guilherme Cain
authors: GC
authors: de Oliveira
authors: Department of Animal Reproduction, Laboratory of Teaching and Research in Pathology of Reproduction, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo, Pirassununga, São Paulo, Brazil.
authors: Carina de Fátima
authors: CF
authors: Guimarães
authors: Department of Animal Production and Nutrition, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo, Pirassununga, São Paulo, Brazil.
authors: Júlio César
authors: JC
authors: de Carvalho Balieiro
authors: Department of Medical Clinic, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
authors: Milton Ricardo
authors: MR
authors: Azedo
authors: Department of Medical Clinic, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
authors: Fábio Celidônio
authors: FC
authors: Pogliani
authors: Department of Animal Reproduction, Laboratory of Teaching and Research in Pathology of Reproduction, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of São Paulo, Pirassununga, São Paulo, Brazil. Electronic address: celeghin@usp.br.
authors: Eneiva Carla Carvalho
authors: ECC
authors: Celeghini
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D002417:Cattle; D004716:Endometritis / Q000473:pathology*; D004717:Endometrium / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology*; D005260:Female; D005298:Fertility; D007315:Insemination, Artificial / Q000662:veterinary*; D011247:Pregnancy; D018873:Pregnancy Rate; D012039:Regional Blood Flow; D007507:Therapeutic Irrigation; D014599:Uterus / Q000098:blood supply / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology
keywords: Cow; Cytobrush; Doppler ultrasound; Endometritis; Pregnancy rate; Uterine hemodynamic