septate uterus
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

323
(FIVE YEARS 71)

H-INDEX

24
(FIVE YEARS 3)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Niknejad
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
pp. 42-46
Author(s):  
Constantin Toncoglaz ◽  
◽  
Serghei Toncoglaz ◽  
Alina Toncoglaz ◽  
◽  
...  

Background: Congenital uterine abnormalities result from abnormal formation, fusion or resorption of the Mullerian ducts during fetal life. These abnormalities have been associated with an increased rate of miscarriage, preterm birth, and other fetal adverse outcomes. Material and methods: Was performed a clinical observational retrospective study of uterine malformations, diagnosed in the Republic of Moldova. Pelvic MRI (1.5-3 tesla) with contrast and without were examined, from 01.01.2016 to 20.11.2016. During this time, 190 MRIs were performed according to the program, 167 MRIs were included in the study, 23 MRIs were excluded, having total or partial hysterectomy performed. The age of the examined persons is between 81 years and 6 months. Results: 15 uterine malformations were detected, which represent 11.13%. Among the uterine abnormalities were detected 6 cases of bicorn uterus, 3 cases of didelph uterus, 2 cases of uterine agenesis and septate uterus and one case of arcuate uterus, and unicorn. Conclusions: In this study it was determined that the prevalence of uterine malformations in an unselected population in the Republic of Moldova is 11.13%, and that of the septate uterus is 1.2%, data that are similar and correspond to the international literature.


Author(s):  
Carla Peixoto ◽  
Maite Castro ◽  
Isabel Carriles ◽  
Maria de Arriba ◽  
Victoria Lapresa ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective Currently, there are up to three different classifications for diagnosing septate uterus. The interobserver agreement among them has been poorly assessed. Objective To assess the interobserver agreement of nonexpert sonographers for classifying septate uterus using the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology/European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESHRE/ESGE), American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), and Congenital Uterine Malformations by Experts (CUME) classifications. Methods A total of 50 three-dimensional (3D) volumes of a nonconsecutive series of women with suspected uterine malformation were used. Two nonexpert examiners evaluated a single 3D volume of the uterus of each woman, blinded to each other. The following measurements were performed: indentation depth, indentation angle, uterine fundal wall thickness, external fundal indentation, and indentation-to-wall-thickness (I:WT) ratio. Each observer had to assign a diagnosis in each case, according to the three classification systems (ESHRE/ESGE, ASRM, and CUME). The interobserver agreement regarding the ESHRE/ESGE, ASRM, and CUME classifications was assessed using the Cohen weighted kappa index (k). Agreement regarding the three classifications (ASRM versus ESHRE/ESGE, ASRM versus CUME, ESHRE/ESGE versus CUME) was also assessed. Results The interobserver agreement between the 2 nonexpert examiners was good for the ESHRE/ESGE (k = 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55–0.92) and very good for the ASRM and CUME classification systems (k = 0.95; 95%CI: 0.86–1.00; and k = 0.91; 95%CI: 0.79–1.00, respectively). Agreement between the ESHRE/ESGE and ASRM classifications was moderate for both examiners. Agreement between the ESHRE/ESGE and CUME classifications was moderate for examiner 1 and good for examiner 2. Agreement between the ASRM and CUME classifications was good for both examiners. Conclusion The three classifications have good (ESHRE/ESGE) or very good (ASRM and CUME) interobserver agreement. Agreement between the ASRM and CUME classifications was higher than that for the ESHRE/ESGE and ASRM and ESHRE/ESGE and CUME classifications.


Author(s):  
Maria Carrera ◽  
Federico Pérez Millan ◽  
Juan Luis Alcázar ◽  
Luis Alonso ◽  
Miguel Caballero ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (S1) ◽  
pp. 47-47
Author(s):  
I. Carriles ◽  
J. Alcazar ◽  
T. Errasti ◽  
A. Ruiz‐Zambrana ◽  
M. Pascual ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 004947552110340
Author(s):  
Saket Ballabh ◽  
Betty Simon ◽  
Emily Divya Ebenezer ◽  
Reetu A John ◽  
A Chandramohan

The diagnosis of Mullerian duct anomaly is crucial because of strong association with infertility, endometriosis and miscarriage. Robert’s uterus is a rare variant of septate uterus. Patients present with recurrent abdominal pain and severe dysmenorrhoea. Magnetic resonance imaging is the investigation of choice. In this case series, we present the imaging features of four such cases.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Iori Kisu ◽  
Kanako Nakamura ◽  
Tetsuro Shiraishi ◽  
Tomoko Iijima ◽  
Moito Iijima ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Robert’s uterus is a rare Mullerian anomaly, which can be described as an asymmetric, septate uterus with a non-communicating hemicavity. Herein, we present the case of a misdiagnosed Robert’s uterus, resulting in an invasive and disadvantageous surgery. Case presentation A 16-year-old woman was referred to our department because of dysmenorrhea and suspicion of uterine malformation. We misdiagnosed Robert’s uterus as a unicornuate uterus with a non-communicating rudimentary horn and hematometra, and performed laparoscopic hemi-hysterectomy. Although the patient’s symptoms were relieved, our surgical procedure left the lateral uterine wall weak, making the patient’s uterus susceptible to uterine rupture in any future pregnancy. Conclusions Although the early diagnosis of Robert’s uterus is challenging, it is important in order to determine appropriate surgical interventions and management for maintaining the quality of life and ensuring safety in future pregnancies.


2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
G Spagnol ◽  
G Bonaldo ◽  
M Marchetti ◽  
A Vitagliano ◽  
A S Laganà ◽  
...  

Abstract Study question How does the septate uterus and his metroplasty influence pregnancy rate (PR), live birth rate (LBR), spontaneous abortion rates (SA) and preterm labour rates (PL)? Summary answer Uterine septum is associated with a poor reproductive outcome. Metroplasty reduce the rate of SA but non-conclusive evidence can be extrapolated about PR and PL. What is known already Different studies evaluated the correlation between uterine septum and reproductive outcomes. On one hand, studies reported its association with poor obstetrics outcomes. On the other hand, recent studies raised doubts about the effectiveness of septum metroplasty to improve reproductive outcomes, although recent position papers continue to propose metroplasty in patients with a septate uterus and a history of infertility or miscarriages. Debate is still ongoing on reproductive outcomes of uterine septum on infertile patients and especially on patients with recurrent miscarriage, leading to an unanswered question whether or not these women should be treated. Study design, size, duration Systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies that evaluated the clinical impact of uterine septum and its metroplasty on reproductive and obstetrics outcomes. The meta-analysis included study with infertile patients or patients with a history of recurrent miscarriage. Searches were conducted using the following search terms: uterine septum, septate uterus, metroplasty, pregnancy rate, live birth rate, spontaneous miscarriage, infertility, preterm delivery. Primary outcomes were PR and LBR. Secondary outcomes were SA and PL. Participants/materials, setting, methods The meta-analysis was written following the PRISMA guidelines. Fifty-nine full-text articles were preselected based on title and abstract. Endpoints were evaluated in three subgroups: 1) infertile/recurrent miscarriage patients with septum versus no septum 2) infertile/recurrent miscarriage patients with treated versus untreated septum 3) infertile/recurrent miscarriage patients before-after septum removal. Odds-ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for outcome measures. Random-effect meta-analysis was performed and a p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Main results and the role of chance Data from 37 articles were extracted. In the first subgroup (10 studies), a lower PR and LBR were associated with septate uterus vs. controls, respectively (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.58; p < 0.000; low-heterogeneity and OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.39; p < 0.0001; small-heterogeneity) and a higher proportion of SA and PL was associated with septate uterus vs. controls, respectively (OR 4.17, 95% CI 2.83 to 6.15; p < 0.000; moderate-heterogeneity and OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.27 to 3.76; p = 0.005; low-heterogeneity). In the second subgroup (8 studies), PR and PL were not different in removed vs. unremoved septum, respectively (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.49; p = 0.82; moderate heterogeneity and OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.08; p = 0.08;low-heterogeneity) and a lower proportion of SA was associated with removed vs. unremoved septum (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.95; p = 0.001; substantial-heterogeneity). In the third subgroup (19 studies), the proportion of LBR was higher after the removal of septum (OR 49.58, 95% CI 29.93 to 82.13; p < 0.0001; moderate-heterogeneity) and the proportion of SA and PL was lower after the removal of septum, respectively (OR 0.02, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.04; p < 0.000; moderate-heterogeneity and OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.08; p = <0.000; low-heterogeneity). Limitations, reasons for caution The present meta-analysis is limited by the observational design of included studies because, in literature, there are no prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In the second and third subgroup of analysis clinical heterogeneity within and between studies represents another limitation. Wider implications of the findings The results of this meta-analysis confirm the detrimental effect of uterine septum on PR, LBR, SA and PL. Its treatment seems to reduce the rate of SA. Metroplasty should still be considered as good clinical practice in patients with a history of infertility and recurrent abortion. Trial registration number Not applicable © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: [email protected].


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document