Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Congenital Uterine Anomalies

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Managing Ultrasonography in Human Reproduction

  • 811 Accesses

Abstract

Congenital uterine anomalies, also known as Müllerian duct anomalies, result from isolated or complex alterations during any step of the embryogenic development of the uterus.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 79.99
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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bajka M, Badir S. Fundus thickness assessment by 3D transvaginal ultrasound allows metrics-based diagnosis and treatment of congenital uterine anomalies. Ultraschall Med. 2015. doi:10.1055/s-0034-1399701.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bermejo C, Ten Martínez P, Cantarero R, Diaz D, Pérez Pedregosa J, Barrón E, et al. Three-dimensional ultrasound in the diagnosis of Müllerian duct anomalies and concordance with magnetic resonance imaging. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010;35:593–601.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bermejo C, Martínez-Ten P, Recio M, Ruiz-López L, Díaz D, Illescas T. Three-dimensional ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging assessment of cervix and vagina in women with uterine malformations. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;43:336–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Caliskan E, Ozkan S, Cakiroglu Y, Sarisoy HT, Corakci A, Ozeren S. Diagnostic accuracy of real-time 3D sonography in the diagnosis of congenital Mullerian anomalies in high-risk patients with respect to the phase of the menstrual cycle. J Clin Ultrasound. 2010;38:123–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chan YY, Jayaprakasan K, Zamorra 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Deutch TD, Abuhamad AZ. The role of 3-dimensional ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of müllerian duct anomalies: a review of the literatura. J Ultrasound Med. 2008;27:413–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Di Spiezio SA, Campo R, Gordts S, Spinelli M, Cosimato C, Tanos V, et al. The comprehensiveness of the ESHRE/ESGE classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies: a systematic review of cases not classified by the AFS system. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:1046–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 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;19:101–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 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;26:1730–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ghi T, Casadio P, Kuleva M, Perrone AM, Savelli L, Giunchi S, et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound in diagnosis and classification of congenital uterine anomalies. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:808–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Graupera B. Validación de la ecografía 3D como técnica diagnóstica de las malformaciones uterinas de origen mülleriano. Barcelona: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Graupera B, Pascual MA, Hereter L, Browne JL, Úbeda B, Rodríguez I, et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound compared with magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of Müllerian duct anomalies using ESHRE-ESGE consensus on the classification of congenital anomalies of the female genital tract. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46:616–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Grimbizis GF, Gordts S, Di Spiezio SA, Brucker S, De Angelis C, Gergolet M, et al. The ESHRE/ESGE consensus on the classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:2032–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Grimbizis GF, Gordts S, Di Spiezio SA, Brucker SY, De Angelis C, Gergolet M, et al. Reply: are the ESHRE/ESGE criteria of female genital anomalies for diagnosis of septate uterus appropriate? Hum Reprod. 2014;29:868–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hall-Craggs MA, Kirkham A, Creighton SM. Renal and urological abnormalities occurring with Mullerian anomalies. J Pediatr Urol. 2013;9:27–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jurkovic D, Geipel A, Gruboeck K, Jauniaux E, Natucci M, Campbell S. Three-dimensional ultrasound for the assessment of uterine anatomy and detection of congenital anomalies: comparison with hysterosalpingography and two-dimensional sonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1995;5:233–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kupesic S, Kurjak A. Septate uterus: detection and prediction of obstetrical complications by different forms of ultrasonography. J Ultrasound Med. 1998;17:631–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kupesić S, Kurjak A, Skenderovic S, Bjelos D. Screening for uterine abnormalities by three-dimensional ultrasound improves perinatal outcome. J Perinat Med. 2002;30:9–17.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 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;20:90–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ludwin A, Ludwin I, Pityński K, Banas T, Jach R. Role of morphologic characteristics of the uterine septum in the prediction and prevention of abnormal healing outcomes after hysteroscopic metroplasty. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:1420–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Ludwin A, Ludwin I, Pitynski K, Jach R, Banas T. Are the ESHRE/ESGE criteria of female genital anomalies for diagnosis of septate uterus appropriate? Hum Reprod. 2014;29:867–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ludwin A, Ludwin I, Kudla M, Kottner J. Reliability of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology/European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy and American Society for Reproductive Medicine classification systems for congenital uterine anomalies detected using three-dimensional ultrasonography. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:688–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Momtaz MM, Ebrashy AN. Three-dimensional ultrasonography in the evaluation of the uterine cavity. Middle East Fertil Soc J. 2007;12:41–6.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Pascual MA, Hereter L, Graupera B, Fernández Cid M, Dexeus S. Ecografía 3D/4D en ginecología: técnica y metodología. Prog Obstet Ginecol. 2006;49:263–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Puscheck EE, Cohen L. Congenital malformations of the uterus. The role of ultrasound. Semin Reprod Med. 2008;26:223–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Raga F, Bonilla-Musoles F, Blanes J, Osborne NG. Congenital Müllerian anomalies: diagnostic accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound. Fertil Steril. 1996;65:523–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. 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 

  30. Saravelos SH, Li TC. Intra- and inter-observer variability of uterine measurements with three-dimensional ultrasound and implications for clinical practice. Reprod Biomed Online. Reprod Biomed Online. 2015;31:557–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Simon C, Martinez L, Pardo F, Tortajada M, Pellicer A. Mullerian defects in women with normal reproductive outcome. Fertil Steril. 1991;56:1192–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. The American Fertility Society classifications of adnexal adhesions, distal tubal obstruction, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, mullerian anomalies and intrauterine adhesions. Fertil Steril. 1988;49:944–55.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. 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 

  35. 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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Wu MH, Hsu CC, Huang KE. Detection of congenital müllerian duct anomalies using three-dimensional ultrasound. J Clin Ultrasound. 1997;25:487–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Under the auspices of the Càtedra d’ Investigació en Obstetrícia i Ginecologia de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.

Thanks to Salvador Graupera for providing the illustrations.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Gynecologic Imagine Service, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproduction, Institut Universitari Dexeus, Barcelona, Spain

    Betlem Graupera MD, PhD & Maria Àngela Pascual MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Betlem Graupera MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Àngela Pascual MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy

    Stefano Guerriero

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil

    Wellington P. Martins

  3. Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Navarra, Spain

    Juan Luis Alcazar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Graupera, B., Pascual, M.À. (2017). Congenital Uterine Anomalies. In: Guerriero, S., Martins, W., Alcazar, J. (eds) Managing Ultrasonography in Human Reproduction. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41037-1_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41037-1_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-41035-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-41037-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation