Skip to main content
Log in

Hysteroscopic Corrections for Complete Septate and T-Shaped Uteri Have Similar Surgical and Reproductive Outcome

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Reproductive Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aim: To compare the surgical results and reproductive Performances of patients with ESHRE/ESGE (European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology/European Society for Gynaecologic Endoscopy) class U1a and U2b uterine anomalies after hysteroscopic correction. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a university hospital infertility clinic. Ninety-six patients with class U2b (complete septate Uterus) and 78 patients with class U1a (T-shaped Uterus) uterine anomalies who underwent hysteroscopic correction between January 2009 and December 2015 were recruited. Results: The Operation time was significantly longer in class U2b anomalies (26.5 ± 5.3 minutes) than class U1a anomalies (22.8 ± 5.8 minutes; mean difference [95% confidence interval [Cl]: 3.6 ± 0.9 [1.8–5.3]; P < .001). Six out of all complete septate patients and 3 of T-shaped patients were reoperated due to postoperative synechia or to further enlarge the cavity. There were no differences between the groups regarding intraoperative (blood loss and uterine rupture) and postoperative (bleeding and infection) complications. After surgical correction, the term delivery rates increased from 3% to 71 % (P < .001) in class U2b and from 4% to 62.1 % (P < .001) in class U1a. The chance of live birth significantly increased after hysteroscopic correction both in class U2b (odds ratio [OR] 106.1; 95% Cl, 29.1–387.1; P < .001) and class U1a (OR 35.7; 95% Cl, 11.6–109.9; P < .001). The postoperative reproductive Performances of both anomalies were similar. Conclusion: Both types of anomalies seem to have similar severity and prognosis. Patients with both types of anomalies have excellent reproductive outcome after hysteroscopic correction.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chan YY, Jayaprakasan K, Zamora J, Thornton JG, Raine-Fenning N, Coomarasamy A. The prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies in imselected and highrisk populations: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17(6):761–771.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Grimbizis GF, Gordts S, Di Spiezio Sardo A, et al. The ESHRE/ ESGE consensus on the Classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(8):2032–2044.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Giacomucci E, Bellavia E, Sandri F, Farina A, Scagliarini G. Term delivery rate after hysteroscopic metroplasty in patients with recurrent spontaneous abortion and T-shaped, arcuate and septate Uterus. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2011;71(3):183–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fox NS, Roman AS, Stern EM, Gerber RS, Saltzman DH, Rebarber A. Type of congenital uterine anomaly and adverse pregnancy outcomes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27(9):949–953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bendifallah S, Faivre E, Legendre G, Deffieux X, Fernandez H. Metroplasty for AFS Class V and VI septate Uterus in patients with infertility or miscarriage: reproductive outcomes study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2013;20(2):178–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Elter K, Yildizhan B, Suntay T, et al. Diagnostic hysteroscopy before IVF: which women are candidates? J Turkish German Gynecol Assoc. 2005;6:217–219.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Uterine septum: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2016;106(3):530–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Paradisi R, Barzanti R, Natali F, Battaglia C, Venturoli S. Hysteroscopic metroplasty in a large population of women with septate Uterus. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2011;18(4):449–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Detti L, Hickman H, D’Ancona RL, Wright AW, Christiansen ME. Relevance of uterine uterine subseptations: what length should Warrant hysteroscopic resection? J Ultrasound Med. 2017;36(4):757–765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaufman RH, Binder GL, Gray PM Jr, Adam E. Upper genital tract changes associated with exposure in utero to diethylstilbes-trol. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1977;128(1):51–59.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Katz Z, Ben-Arie A, Lurie S, Manor M, Insler V. Beneficial effect of hysteroscopic metroplasty on the reproductive outcome in a “T-shaped” Uterus. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 1996;41(1):41–43.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Garbin O, Ohl J, Bettahar-Lebugle K, Dellenbach P. Hysteroscopic metroplasty in diethylstilboestrol-exposed and hypoplastic Uterus: a report on 24 cases. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(10):2751–2755.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Barranger E, Gervaise A, Doumerc S, Fernandez H. Reproductive Performance after hysteroscopic metroplasty in the hypoplastic Uterus: a study of 29 cases. BJOG. 2002;109(12):1331–1334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Fernandez H, Garbin O, Castaigne V, Gervaise A, Levaillant JM. Surgical approach to and reproductive outcome after surgical correction of a T-shaped Uterus. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(7):1730–1734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kupesic S, Kurjak A. Septate Uterus: detection and prediction of obstetrical complications by different forms of ultrasonography. J Ultrasound Med. 1998;17(10):631–636.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Esmailzadeh S, Delavar M, Andarieh M. Reproductive outcome following hysteroscopic treatment of uterine septum. Mater Sociomed. 2014;26(6):366–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dural O, Yasa C, Bastu E, et al. Reproductive outcomes of hysteroscopic septoplasty techniques. JSIS. 2015;19(4):e2015. 00085.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ahmadi F, Zafarani F, Shahrzad GS. Hysterosalpingographic appearances of female genital tract tuberculosis part II: Uterus. Int J Fertil Steril. 2014;8(1):13–20.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Di Spiezio Sardo A, Florio P, Nazzaro G, et al. Hysteroscopic outpatient metroplasty to expand dysmorphic uteri (HOME-DU technique): a pilot study. Reprod Biomed Online. 2015;30(2):166–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Marion LL, Meeks GR. Ectopic pregnancy: history, incidence, epidemiology, and risk factors. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2012;55(2):376–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yavuz Emre Şükür MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Şükür, Y.E., Yakıştıran, B., Özmen, B. et al. Hysteroscopic Corrections for Complete Septate and T-Shaped Uteri Have Similar Surgical and Reproductive Outcome. Reprod. Sci. 25, 1649–1654 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1177/1933719118756774

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1933719118756774

Keywords

Navigation