Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Reproductive outcomes after uterine septum resection in patients with recurrent miscarriage or infertility: a retrospective study in Chinese women

  • Gynecologic Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

Septate uterus is the most common structural uterine anomaly, which is related to the adverse pregnancy outcomes in women of childbearing age. This article provides a retrospective review of hysteroscopic uterine septum resection performed in our hospital during recent years, focusing on the patients with recurrent miscarriage and primary infertility, and also to identify which patients are more likely to benefit from the surgery.

Methods

This is a single-center retrospective study. Cases of women who underwent hysteroscopic septum resection at West China Second Hospital of Sichuan University from January 2014 to December 2019, retrieved through the medical record system, were divided into three groups: Group A was the recurrent miscarriage group, Group B had a history of pregnancy with spontaneous abortion once at most, and Group C was the primary infertility group. Each patient was followed up by telephone about further pregnancy, miscarriage and live birth for at least 1 year.

Results

A total of 176 surgical patients were included in this study. Group A, B, and C include 42, 74, and 60 cases, respectively. The postoperative pregnancy rates of the three groups were 71.4, 82.4, and 75.0%; live births rates were 50.0, 74.3, and 71.7%; and spontaneous abortion rates were 21.4, 17.6, and 13.3%. 62 patients had a complete uterine septum and 114 had a partial uterine septum. For patients with complete septate uterus, the preoperative pregnancy rate was 54.84% and the pregnancy rate increased to 85.48% after surgery; and yet the preoperative and postoperative pregnancy rates in patients with partial septate uterus were close (from 71.9 to 72.8%).

Conclusions

After uterine septum resection, the pregnancy rate and spontaneous abortion rate in RSA patients were not significantly different from the other two groups, but the live birth rate was still significantly lower. Patients with complete uterine septum may benefit more from surgery. The surgical indications should be carefully and strictly evaluated.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Saridogan E, Salman M, Direk LS, Alchami A (2021) Reproductive performance following hysteroscopic surgery for uterine septum: results from a single surgeon data. J Clin Med 10(1):130

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Bhagavath B, Ellie G, Griffiths KM et al (2017) Uterine malformations: an update of diagnosis, management and outcomes. Obstet Gynecol Surv 72(6):377–392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Uterine septum: a guideline. Fertil Steril 2016 106(3): 530–40.

  4. Wang S, Wang K, Hu Q, Liao H, Wang X, Yu H (2022) Perinatal outcomes of women with Müllerian anomalies. Arch Gynecol Obstet

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Grimbizis GF, Camus M, Tarlatzis BC, Bontis JN, Devroey P (2001) Clinical implications of uterine malformations and hysteroscopic treatment results. Hum Reprod Update 7(2):161–174

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Piriyev E, Römer T (2020) Coincidence of uterine malformations and endometriosis: a clinically relevant problem. Arch Gynecol Obstet 302(5):1237–1241

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Raga F, Casañ EM, Bonilla-Musoles F (2009) Expression of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors in the endometrium of septate uterus. Fertil Steril 92(3):1085–1090

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fayez JA (1986) Comparison between abdominal and hysteroscopic metroplasty. Obstet Gynecol 68(3):399–403

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fedele L, Bianchi S, Marchini M, Franchi D, Tozzi L, Dorta M (1996) Ultrastructural aspects of endometrium in infertile women with septate uterus. Fertil Steril 65(4):750–752

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sparac V, Kupesic S, Ilijas M, Zodan T, Kurjak A (2001) Histologic architecture and vascularization of hysteroscopically excised intrauterine septa. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 8(1):111–116

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gundabattula SR, Joseph E, Marakani LR, Dasari S, Nirmalan PK (2014) Reproductive outcomes after resection of intrauterine septum. J Obstet Gynaecol 34(3):235–237

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Freud A, Harlev A, Weintraub AY, Ohana E, Sheiner E (2015) Reproductive outcomes following uterine septum resection. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 28(18):2141–2144

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Tonguc EA, Var T, Batioglu S (2011) Hysteroscopic metroplasty in patients with a uterine septum and otherwise unexplained infertility. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 113(2):128–130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fox NS, Connolly CT, Hill MB, Klahr RA, Zafman KB, Rebarber A (2019) Pregnancy outcomes in viable pregnancies with a septate uterus compared with viable pregnancies after hysteroscopic uterine septum resection. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 1(2):136–143

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Rikken JF, Kowalik CR, Emanuel MH et al (2017) Septum resection for women of reproductive age with a septate uterus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1(1):CD008576

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rikken J, Kowalik CR, Emanuel MH et al (2021) Septum resection versus expectant management in women with a septate uterus: an international multicentre open-label randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 36(5):1260–1267

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Rikken J, Verhorstert K, Emanuel MH et al (2020) Septum resection in women with a septate uterus: a cohort study. Hum Reprod 35(7):1578–1588

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Vercellini P, Chiaffarino F, Parazzini F (2021) ‘It’s all too much’†: the shadow of overtreatment looms over hysteroscopic metroplasty for septate uterus. Hum Reprod 36(5):1166–1170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sugi MD, Penna R, Jha P et al (2021) Müllerian duct anomalies: role in fertility and pregnancy. Radiographics 41(6):1857–1875

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (2020) Electronic address: asrm@asrm.org. Definitions of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 113(3): 533–535

  22. Bender Atik R, Christiansen OB, Elson J et al (2018) ESHRE guideline: recurrent pregnancy loss. Hum Reprod Open 2:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  23. Valle RF, Ekpo GE (2013) Hysteroscopic metroplasty for the septate uterus: review and meta-analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 20(1):22–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Grimbizis GF, Gordts S, Di Spiezio SA et al (2013) The ESHRE-ESGE consensus on the classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies. Gynecol Surg 10(3):199–212

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Edström K, Fernström I (1970) The diagnostic possibilities of a modified hysteroscopic technique. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 49(4):327–330

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Paradisi R, Barzanti R, Fabbri R (2014) The techniques and outcomes of hysteroscopic metroplasty. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 26(4):295–301

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Yin X, Cheng J, Ansari SH et al (2018) Hysteroscopic tissue removal systems for the treatment of intrauterine pathology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Facts Views Vis Obgyn 10(4):207–213

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Agostini A, De Guibert F, Salari K, Crochet P, Bretelle F, Gamerre M (2009) Adverse obstetric outcomes at term after hysteroscopic metroplasty. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 16(4):454–457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Checa MA, Bellver J, Bosch E et al (2018) Hysteroscopic septum resection and reproductive medicine: a SWOT analysis. Reprod Biomed Online 37(6):709–715

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Zhang E, Zhang Y, Fang L, Li Q, Gu J (2014) Combined hysterolaparoscopy for the diagnosis of female infertility: a retrospective study of 132 patients in China. Mater Sociomed 26(3):156–157

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Bakas P, Gregoriou O, Hassiakos D, Liapis A, Creatsas M, Konidaris S (2012) Hysteroscopic resection of uterine septum and reproductive outcome in women with unexplained infertility. Gynecol Obstet Invest 73(4):321–325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Chen HX, Lv SG, Zhang YN et al (2021) Effect of hysteroscopic septum resection on subsequent in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes in cases of primary infertility. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 50(9):102149

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Carrera M, Pérez Millan F, Alcázar JL et al (2021) Effect of hysteroscopic metroplasty on reproductive outcomes in women with septate uterus: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 29(4):465–475

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Akhtar MA, Saravelos SH, Li TC, Jayaprakasan K (2020) Reproductive implications and management of congenital uterine anomalies: scientific impact paper no. 62 november 2019. BJOG 127(5):e1–e13

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Pang LH, Li MJ, Li M, Xu H, Wei ZL (2011) Not every subseptate uterus requires surgical correction to reduce poor reproductive outcome. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 115(3):260–263

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Dimitriadis E, Menkhorst E, Saito S, Kutteh WH, Brosens JJ (2020) Recurrent pregnancy loss. Nat Rev Dis Primers 6(1):98

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other supports were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, West China Second Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 20 Block 3, Renminnan Road, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan Province, China

    Zhu Lan, Run He, Ying Long, Shanshan Zhou, Guangji Xia, Fu Jing, Mingrong Xi & Yunwei Ouyang

  2. Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Sichuan University, Ministry of Education, Chengdu, China

    Zhu Lan, Run He, Ying Long, Shanshan Zhou, Guangji Xia, Fu Jing, Mingrong Xi & Yunwei Ouyang

Authors
  1. Zhu Lan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Run He
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ying Long
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shanshan Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Guangji Xia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Fu Jing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mingrong Xi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yunwei Ouyang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yunwei Ouyang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Ethical approval

This is an observational study. The Medical Ethics Committee of West China Second Hospital has confirmed that no ethical approval is required.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 39 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lan, Z., He, R., Long, Y. et al. Reproductive outcomes after uterine septum resection in patients with recurrent miscarriage or infertility: a retrospective study in Chinese women. Arch Gynecol Obstet 307, 609–617 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-022-06794-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-022-06794-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation