Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Congenital Müllerian Anomalies pp 81–94Cite as

The Septate Uterus

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 1028 Accesses

Abstract

The septate uterus is the most common of all the uterine anomalies, accounting for about 35 % of all uterine anomalies. It is associated with recurrent miscarriage and adverse pregnancy outcomes, including preterm delivery. The role of the septate uterus in infertility is controversial. It occurs in 1 % of the fertile population, 3 % of the infertility population, and 5.3 % of the recurrent miscarriage population. The best modalities for diagnosing a septate uterus include a 3D ultrasound, with or without saline infusion, and an MRI. Hysteroscopic metroplasty improves reproductive outcomes in women with recurrent miscarriage and is a simple, well-tolerated procedure with a low complication rate.

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

References

  1. Grimbizis GF, Camus M, Tarlatzis BC, Bontis JN, Devroey P. Clinical implications of uterine malformations and hysteroscopic treatment results. Hum Reprod Update. 2001;7(2):161–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Saravelos SH, Cocksedge KA, Li TC. Prevalence and diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies in women with reproductive failure: a critical appraisal. Hum Reprod Update. 2008;14:415–29. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmn018; PMID: 18539641.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Haddad B, Louis-Sylvestre C, Poitout P, Paniel BJ. Longitudinal vaginal septum: a retrospective study of 202 cases. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1997;74:197–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Heinonen PK. Complete septate uterus with longitudinal vaginal septum. Fertil Steril. 2006;85:700–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  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(6):761–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. 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(6):1099–103.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dreisler E, Stampe Sørensen S. Müllerian duct anomalies diagnosed by saline contrast sonohysterography: prevalence in a general population. Fertil Steril. 2014;102(2):525–9. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.04.043. Epub 2014 May 27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fedele L, Bianchi S, Frontino G. Septums and synechiae: approaches to surgical correction. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2006;49:767–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wallach EE. The uterine factor in infertility. Fertil Steril. 1972;23(2):138–58. PMID: 4551503.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lin PC, Bhatnagar KP, Nettleton GS, et al. Female genital anomalies affecting reproduction. Fertil Steril. 2002;78(5):899–915.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee DM, Osathanondh R, Yeh J. Localization of Bcl-2 in the human fetal Müllerian tract. Fertil Steril. 1998;70:135–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. American Fertility Society. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Buttram VC, Gibbons WE. Müllerian anomalies: a proposed classification. (An analysis of 144 cases). Fertil Steril. 1979;32(1):40–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Crosby WM, Hill EC. Embryology of the Mullerian duct system. A review of present-day theory. Obstet Gynecol. 1962;20:507–15.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. McBean JH, Brumsted JR. Septate uterus with cervical duplication: a rare malformation. Fertil Steril. 1994;62(2):415–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Musset R, Muller T, Netter A, Solal E, Vinourd JC, Gillet JV. Etat du haut appareil urinaire chez les porteuses de malformations uterines, etude de 133 observations. Presse Med. 1967;75:1331–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Acién P, et al. Embryological observations on the female genital tract. Hum Reprod. 1992;7:437–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Acién P, et al. Complex malformations of the female genital tract. New types and revision of classification. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:2377–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ludwin A, Ludwin I. Comparison of the ESHRE-ESGE and ASRM classifications of Mullerian duct anomalies in everyday practice. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:569–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rackow BW, Arici A. Reproductive performance of women with Müllerian anomalies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2007;19(3):229–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ludwin A, Ludwin I, Banas T, Knafel A, Miedzyblocki M, Basta A. Diagnostic accuracy of sonohysterography, hysterosalpingography and diagnostic hysteroscopy in diagnosis of arcuate, septate and bicornuate uterus. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2011;37:178–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Salim R, Woelfer B, Backos M, Regan L, Jurkovic D. Reproducibility of three dimensional ultrasound diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;21:578–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bermejo C, Ten Martınez P, Cantarero R, Diaz D, Perez Pedregosa J, Barron E, Labrador E, Ruiz López L. Three-dimensional ultrasound in the diagnosis of Mullerian duct anomalies and concordance with magnetic resonance imaging. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010;35:593–601.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Grimbizis GF, Gordts S, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Brucker S, De Angelis C, Gergolet M, Li TC, Tanos V, Brölmann H, Gianaroli L, et al. The ESHRE/ESGE consensus on the classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:2032–44.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Breech LL, Laufer MR. Müllerian anomalies. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am. 2009;36:47–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ludwin A, Ludwin I, Pityński K, Banas T, Jach R. Differentiating between a double cervix or cervical duplication and a complete septate uterus with longitudinal vaginal septum. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;52(2):308–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Pellerito JS, McCarthy SM, Doyle MB, et al. Diagnosis of uterine anomalies: relative accuracy of MR imaging, endovaginal sonography, and hysterosalpingography. Radiology. 1992;183(3):795–800.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Berger A, Batzer F, Lev-Toaff A, Berry-Roberts C. Diagnostic imaging modalities for Mullerian anomalies: the case for a new gold standard. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21:335–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Nicolini U, Bellotti M, Bonazzi B, et al. Can ultrasound be used to screen uterine malformations? Fertil Steril. 1987;47(1):89–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Ghi T, Casadio P, Kuleva M, et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound in diagnosis and classification of congenital uterine anomalies. Fertil Steril. 2009;92(2):808–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Faivre E, Fernandez H, Deffieux X, Gervaise A, Frydman R, Levaillant JM. Accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasonography in differential diagnosis of septate and bicornuate uterus compared with office hysteroscopy and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2012;19(1):101–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ludwin A, Pityński K, Ludwin I, Banas T, Knafel A. Two- and three dimensional ultrasonography and sonohysterography versus hysteroscopy with laparoscopy in the differential diagnosis of septate, bicornuate, and arcuate uteri. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2013;20(1):90–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Taylor E, Gomel V. The uterus and fertility. Fertil Steril. 2008;89(1):1–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Mollo A, de Franciscis P, Colacurci N, Cobellis L, Perino A, Venezia R, et al. Hysteroscopic resection of the septum improves the pregnancy rate of women with unexplained infertility: a prospective controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:2628–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Shokeir T, Abdelshaheed M, El-Shafei M, Sherif L, Badawy A. Determinants of fertility and reproductive success after hysteroscopic septoplasty for women with unexplained primary infertility: a prospective analysis of 88 cases. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2011;155:54–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Tomaževič T, Ban-Frangež H, Virant-Klun I, Verdenik I, Požlep B, Vrtačnik-Bokal E. Septate, subseptate and arcuate uterus decrease pregnancy and live birth rates in IVF/ICSI. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010;21(5):700–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Abuzeid M, Ghourab G, Abuzeid O, Mitwally M, Ashraf M, Diamond M. Reproductive outcome after IVF following hysteroscopic division of incomplete uterine septum/arcuate uterine anomaly in women with primary infertility. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2014;6(4):194–202.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Candiani GB, Vercellini P, Fedele L, Carinelli SG, Merlo D, Arcaini L. Repair of the uterine cavity after hysteroscopic septal incision. Fertil Steril. 1990;54(6):991–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Tonguc EA, Var T, Yilmaz N, Batioglu S. Intrauterine device or estrogen treatment after hysteroscopic uterine septum resection. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2010;109:226–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Guida M, Acunzo G, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Bifulco G, Piccoli R, Pellicano M, et al. Effectiveness of auto-crosslinked hyaluronic acid gel in the prevention of intrauterine adhesions after hysteroscopic surgery: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:1461–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Thinkhamrop J, Laopaiboon M, Lumbiganon P. Prophylactic antibiotics for transcervical intrauterine procedures. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(5):CD005637.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Bhattacharya S, Parkin DE, Reid TM, et al. A prospective randomised study of the effects of prophylactic antibiotics on the incidence of bacteraemia following hysteroscopic surgery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1995;63:37–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Damewood MD, Rock JA. Chapter 19: Uterine reconstructive surgery. In: Hunt RB, editor. Text and atlas of female infertility surgery. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1999. p. 274–8.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Cararach M, Penella J, Ubeda A, Labastida R. Hysteroscopic incision of the septate uterus: scissors versus resectoscope. Hum Reprod. 1994;9(1):87–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Colacurci N, Franciscis PD, Mollo A, Litta P, Perino A, Cobellis L, et al. Small diameter hysteroscopy with Versapoint versus resectoscopy with a unipolar knife for the treatment of septate uterus: a prospective randomized study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2007;14:622–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Litta P, Spiller E, Saccardi C, Ambrosini G, Caserta D, Cosmi E. Resectoscope or Versapoint for hysteroscopic metroplasty. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2008;101:39–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Yang J, Yin TU, Xu WM, Xia LG, Li AB, Hu J. Reproductive outcome of septate uterus after hysteroscopic treatment with neodymium:YAG laser. Photomed Laser Surg. 2006;24:625–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Candiani GB, Vercellini P, Fedele L, Garsia S, Brioschi D, Villa L. Argon laser versus microscissors for hysteroscopic incision of uterine septa. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991;164(1 Pt 1):87–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Bettocchi S, Ceci O, Nappi L, Pontrelli G, Pinto L, Vicino M. Office hysteroscopic metroplasty: three “diagnostic criteria” to differentiate between septate and bicornuate uteri. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2007;14(3):324–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Patton PE, Novy MJ, Lee DM, Hickok LR. The diagnosis and reproductive outcomes after surgical treatment of the complete septate uterus, duplicated cervix and vaginal septum. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190:1669–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Wang JH, Xu KH, Lin J, Chen XZ. Hysteroscopic septum resection of complete septate uterus with cervical duplication, sparing the double cervix in patients with recurrent spontaneous abortions or infertility. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:2643–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Yang JH, Chen MJ, Shih JC, Chen CD, Chen SU, Yang YS. Light-guided hysteroscopic resection of complete septate uterus with preservation of duplicated cervix. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21:940–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Nouri K, Ott J, Huber JC, Fischer EM, Stoqbauer L, Tempfer CB. Reproductive outcome after hysteroscopic septopasty in patients with septate uterus—a retrospective cohort study and systematic review of the literature. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2010;8:52.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Sentilhes L, Sergent F, Roman H, Verspyck E, Marpeau L. Late complications of operative hysteroscopy: predicting patients at risk of uterine rupture during subsequent pregnancy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005;120:134–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Sentilhes L, Sergent F, Berthier A, Catala L, Descamps P, Marpeau L. Uterine rupture following operative hysteroscopy. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2006;34(11):1064–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Fedele L, Bianchi S, Marchini M, Mezzopane R, Di Nola G, Tozzi L. Residual uterine septum of less than 1cm after hysteroscopic metroplasty does not impair reproductive outcome. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:727–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Venetis CA, Papadopoulos SP, Campo R, Gordts S, Tarlatzis BC, Grimbizis GF. Clinical implications of congenital uterine anomalies: a meta-analysis of comparative studies. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;29:665–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Gundabattula SR, Joseph E, Marakani LR, Dasari S, Nirmalan PK. Reproductive outcomes after resection of intrauterine septum. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014;34:235–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Freud A, Harlev A, Weintraub AY, Ohana E, Sheiner E. Reproductive outcomes following uterine septum resection. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014. doi:10.3109/14767058.2014.981746.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Kowlaik CR, Goddijn M, Emanuel MH, Bongers MY, Spinder T, de Kruif JH, Mol BW, Heineman MJ. Metroplasty verses expectant management for women with recurrent uterus and a septate uterus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;(6):CD008576.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Tehraninejad ES, Ghaffari F, Jahangiri N, Oroomiechiha M, Akhoond MR, Aziminekoo E. Reproductive outcome following hysteroscopic monopolar metroplasty: an analysis of 203 cases. Int J Fertil Steril. 2013;7:175–80.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Obstetrics and Gynecology & Women’s Health,Division of Reproductive Endocrinology & Infertility, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA

    Staci E. Pollack M.D.

  2. Obstetrics Gynecology and Women’s Health, Montefiore Medical Center, Belfer Education Center, 1300 Morris Park Ave, Bronx, NY, 10463, USA

    M. Alexa Clapp M.D. & Michelle Goldsammler

Authors
  1. Staci E. Pollack M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Alexa Clapp M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michelle Goldsammler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Staci E. Pollack M.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA

    Samantha M. Pfeifer

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License, which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pollack, S.E., Clapp, M.A., Goldsammler, M. (2016). The Septate Uterus. In: Pfeifer, S. (eds) Congenital Müllerian Anomalies. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27231-3_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27231-3_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-27229-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-27231-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation