Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Current Work-Up for Screening and Diagnosing Female Genital Malformations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Female Genital Tract Congenital Malformations

  • 1540 Accesses

Abstract

Aim(s): to describe and critically evaluate the role of the currently available diagnostic techniques for female genital tract anomalies, taking into account their diagnostic performance, availability, cost and invasiveness; to propose a practical and updated algorithm for screening and diagnosing female genital malformations, in order to address the patient to the proper treatment. Brief description of the reviewed data: the evidence to date suggests that several investigations have a satisfactory overall diagnostic performance in diagnosing the presence of a female genital tract congenital anomaly. The most accurate investigations in order seem to be: (i) 3D US, (ii) HyCoSy, (iii) MRI, (iv) 2D US and (v) HSG. Recently, new data are emerging regarding the integration of hysteroscopic findings with 3D US data. Clinical implications: when a female genital tract anomaly is suspected, the gynaecological examination should be the initial approach before scheduling the patients for further investigations. Then, 2D-US should be the basic imaging method, which could be enlarged with HyCoSy and ambulatory mini-hysteroscopy. Finally, further detailed information on uterine anatomy can be obtained with the use of 3D-US, in order to address the patient to the proper treatment. Open issues for further research: further studies are still needed to validate this practical and updated algorithm for screening and diagnosing female genital malformations, as well as for enhancing the use of a standardized diagnostic codes, in order to improve communication among different specialists and centres.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Mazouni C, Girard G, Deter R, et al. Diagnosis of Mullerian anomalies in adults. Evaluation of practice. Fertil Steril. 2008;89(1):219–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Acien P, Acien MI. The history of female genital tract malformation classifications and proposal of an updated system. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17:693–705.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Aittomaki K, Eroila H, Kajanoja P. A population-based study of the incidence of Mu¨llerian aplasia in Finland. Fertil Steril. 2001;76:624–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. American Fertility Society. The AFS classification of adnexal adhesions, distal tubal occlusion, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, Mullerian anomalies and intrauterine adhesions. Fertil Steril. 1988;49:944–55.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Buttram VC, Gibbons WE. Mullerian anomalies: a proposed classification (an analysis of 144 cases). Fertil Steril. 1979;32:40–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chan YY, Jayaprakasan K, Zamora J, Thornton JG, Raine-Fenning N, Coomarasamy A. The prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies in unselected and high-risk populations: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17:761–71, 2011.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chan YY, Jayarpakasan K, Tan A, Thornton JG, Coomarasamy A, Raine-Fenning NJ. Reproductive outcomes in women with congenital uterine anomalies: a systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;38:371–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Saravelos SH, Cocksedge KA, Li T-C. Prevalence and diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies in women with reproductive failure: a critical appraisal. Hum Reprod Update. 2008;14:415–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Letterie GS. Structural abnormalities and reproductive failure: effective techniques of diagnosis and management. New York: Blackwell Science; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Taylor E, Gomel V. The uterus and fertility. Fertil Steril. 2008;89:1–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Homer HA, Li TC, Cooke ID. The septate uterus: a review of management and reproductive outcome. Fertil Steril. 2000;73:1–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Oppelt P, Renner SP, Brucker S, Strissel PL, Strick R, Oppelt PG, Doerr HG, Schott GE, Hucke J, Wallwiener D, et al. The VCUAM (Vagina Cervix Uterus Adnex Associated Malformation) classification: a new classification for genital malformations. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:1493–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gubbini G, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Nascetti D, Marra E, Spinelli M, Greco E, Casadio P, Nappi C. New outpatient subclassification system for American Fertility Society classes V and VI uterine anomalies. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2009;16:554–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rock JA, Roberts CP, Jones HW. Congenital anomalies of the uterine cervix: lessons from 30 cases managed clinically by a common protocol. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1858–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Grimbizis GF, Campo R. Congenital malformations of the female genital tract: the need for a new classification system. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:401–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Grimbizis GF, Camus M, Tarlatzis BC, Bontis JN, Devroey P. Clinical implications of uterine malformations and hysteroscopic treatment results. Hum Reprod Update. 2001;7:161–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Grimbizis GF, Campo R; on Behalf of the SC of the CONUTA ESHRE/ESGE Working Group, Gordts G, Brucker S, Gergolet M, Tanos V, Li T-C, De Angelis C, Di Spiezio Sardo A. Clinical approach for the classification of congenital uterine malformations. Gynecol Surg. 2012;9:119–29.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Soares SR, Barbosa dos Reis MM, Camargos AF. Diagnostic accuracy of sonohysterography, transvaginal sonography, and hysterosalpingography in patients with uterine cavity diseases. Fertil Steril. 2000;73(2): 406–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Troiano RN, McCarthy SM. Mu¨llerian duct anomalies: imaging and clinical issues. Radiology. 2004;233:19–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kupesic S. Clinical implications of sonographic detection of uterine anomalies for reproductive outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001;18:387–400.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hamilton JA, Larson AJ, Lower AM, Hasnain S, Grudzinskas JG. Routine use of saline hysterosonography in 500 consecutive, unselected, infertile women. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:2463–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Woelfer B, Salim R, Banerjee S, Elson J, Regan L, Jurkovic D. Reproductive outcomes in women with congenital uterine anomalies detected by three dimensional ultrasound screening. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;98:1099–103.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Naples “Federico II”, Via Pansini 5, Naples, Italy

    Attilio Di Spiezio Sardo MD, Marialuigia Spinelli & Carmine Nappi

Authors
  1. Attilio Di Spiezio Sardo MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marialuigia Spinelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carmine Nappi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Attilio Di Spiezio Sardo MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Medical School, Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Grigoris F. Grimbizis

  2. Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Genk Institute for Fertility Technology, Leuven, Belgium

    Rudi Campo

  3. Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Medical School, Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Basil C. Tarlatzis

  4. Leuven Institute for Fertility & Embryology, Leuven, Belgium

    Stephan Gordts

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sardo, A.D.S., Spinelli, M., Nappi, C. (2015). Current Work-Up for Screening and Diagnosing Female Genital Malformations. In: Grimbizis, G., Campo, R., Tarlatzis, B., Gordts, S. (eds) Female Genital Tract Congenital Malformations. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-5146-3_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-5146-3_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-5145-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-5146-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation