Endometriosis represents a frequently diagnosed gynecological affliction in the reproductive timespan of women, defined by symptoms ranging from pelvic pain to infertility. A complex interplay between the genetic profile, hormonal activity, menstrual cyclicity, inflammation status, and immunological factors define the phenotypic presentation of endometriosis. To date, imaging techniques represent the gold standard in diagnosing endometriosis, of which transvaginal ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging bring the most value to the diagnostic step. Current medical treatment options for endometriosis-associated infertility focus on either stimulating the follicular development and ovulation or on inhibiting the growth and development of endometriotic lesions. Techniques of assisted reproduction consisting of superovulation with in vitro fertilization or intrauterine insemination represent effective treatment alternatives that improve fertility in patients suffering from endometriosis. Emerging therapies such as the usage of antioxidant molecules and stem cells still need future research to prove the therapeutic efficacy in this pathology.

Ovarian cancer is one of the most common causes of death in women as survival is highly dependent on the stage of the disease. Ovarian cancer is typically diagnosed in the late stage due to the fact that in the early phases is mostly asymptomatic. Genomic instability is one of the hallmarks of ovarian cancer. While ovarian cancer is stratified into different clinical subtypes, there still exists extensive genetic and progressive diversity within each subtype. Early detection of the disorder is one of the most important steps that facilitate a favorable prognosis and a good response to medical therapy for the patients. In targeted therapies, individual patients are treated by agents targeting the changes in tumor cells that help them grow, divide and spread. Currently, in gynecological malignancies, potential therapeutic targets include tumor-intrinsic signaling pathways, angiogenesis, homologous-recombination deficiency, hormone receptors, and immunologic factors. Ovarian cancer is usually diagnosed in the final stages, partially due to the absence of an effective screening strategy, although, over the times, numerous biomarkers have been studied and used to assess the status, progression, and efficacy of the drug therapy in this type of disorder.

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are small vesicles ranging from 20–200 nm to 10 μm in diameter that are discharged and taken in by many different types of cells. Depending on the nature and quantity of their content—which generally includes proteins, lipids as well as microRNAs (miRNAs), messenger-RNA (mRNA), and DNA—these particles can bring about functional modifications in the receiving cells. During pregnancy, placenta and/or fetal-derived EVs have recently been isolated, eliciting interest in discovering their clinical significance. To date, various studies have associated variations in the circulating levels of maternal and fetal EVs and their contents, with complications including gestational diabetes and preeclampsia, ultimately leading to adverse pregnancy outcomes. Furthermore, EVs have also been identified as messengers and important players in viral infections during pregnancy, as well as in various congenital malformations. Their presence can be detected in the maternal blood from the first trimester and their level increases towards term, thus acting as liquid biopsies that give invaluable insight into the status of the feto-placental unit. However, their exact roles in the metabolic and vascular adaptations associated with physiological and pathological pregnancy is still under investigation. Analyzing peer-reviewed journal articles available in online databases, the purpose of this review is to synthesize current knowledge regarding the utility of quantification of pregnancy related EVs in general and placental EVs in particular as non-invasive evidence of placental dysfunction and adverse pregnancy outcomes, and to develop the current understanding of these particles and their applicability in clinical practice.

In the latter part of the 20th century, remarkable developments in new dental materials and technologies were achieved. However, regarding the impact of dental resin-based materials 3D-printed on cellular responses, there have been a limited number of published studies recently. The biocompatibility of dental restorative materials is a controversial topic, especially when discussing modern manufacturing technologies. Three-dimensional printing generates the release of residual monomers due to incomplete polymerization of materials and involves the use of potentially toxic substances in post-printing processes that cannot be completely eliminated. Considering the issue of biocompatibility, this article aims to establish an overview of this aspect, summarizing the different types of biocompatibility tests performed on materials used in 3D printing in dentistry. In order to create this comprehensive review, articles dealing with the issue of 3D printing in dentistry were analysed by accessing the main specialized search engines using specific keywords. Relevant data referring to types of materials used in 3DP to manufacture various dental devices, polymerization methods, factors affecting monomer release, cytotoxicity of unreacted products or post-curing treatments, and methods for assessing biocompatibility were analysed. Although the introduction of new restorative materials used in dental treatments is subject to national and international regulations and standards, it is necessary to investigate them regarding biocompatibility in order to support or deny the manufacturers’ statements regarding this aspect.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19), has been isolated from various tissues and body fluids, including the placenta, amniotic fluid, and umbilical cord of newborns. In the last few years, much scientific effort has been directed toward studying SARS-CoV-2, focusing on the different features of the virus, such as its structure and mechanisms of action. Moreover, much focus has been on developing accurate diagnostic tools and various drugs or vaccines to treat COVID-19. However, the available evidence is still scarce and consistent criteria should be used for diagnosing vertical transmission. Applying the PRISMA ScR guidelines, we conducted a scoping review with the primary objective of identifying the types, and examining the range, of available evidence of vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from mother to newborn. We also aimed to clarify the key concepts and criteria for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 vertical infection in neonates and summarize the existing evidence and advance the awareness of SARS-CoV-2 vertical infection in pregnancy. Most studies we identified were case reports or case series (about 30% of poor quality and inconsistent reporting of the findings). Summarizing the existing classification criteria, we propose an algorithm for consistent diagnosis. Registration: INPLASY2022120093.

Aim: The aim of the study was to synthesize validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in women with endometriosis and to outline their clinical implications. Methods: We conducted a narrative review of English-language literature indexed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, covering the period 2014–2024, with earlier seminal studies included where relevant. We focused on validated PROMs for QoL but also considered standardized tools such as the Endometriosis Fertility Index (EFI), rASRM, and #Enzian classifications, given their role in clinical interpretation and counseling. Findings: Generic instruments (SF-36, WHOQOL-BREF, EQ-5D), disease-specific tools (EHP-30, EHP-5), and fertility-related questionnaires (FertiQoL, FPI) have demonstrated validity and responsiveness; however, these are inconsistently applied in practice. Knowledge gaps remain regarding routine implementation, timing, and frequency of assessment, and integration with clinical staging or fertility indices (e.g., EFI). Global frameworks such as the WERF EPHect platform facilitate standardized clinical and surgical data capture, though their use is primarily in research rather than routine care. Conclusions: We recommend combining a disease-specific PROM (EHP-30/EHP-5) with a generic instrument (SF-36 or EQ-5D) and adding FertiQoL when fertility is relevant. PROMs should be collected longitudinally (baseline, post-intervention, follow-up) and interpreted alongside clinical context, including pain phenotype, surgical staging (#Enzian/rASRM), and fertility goals. Embedding PROMs into multidisciplinary pathways enables shared decision-making, individualized treatment planning, and improved comparability of patient-centered outcomes.