{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,8]],"date-time":"2026-09-08T01:58:57Z","timestamp":1788832737696,"version":"build-2803163510"},"reference-count":32,"publisher":"Galenos Yayinevi","issue":"2","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Facts Views Vis ObGyn"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2022,6,30]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>Background: High discrepancy between current classifications was observed in the definition of uterine septa, especially for indentation lengths &gt;5 &lt;10mm.\n\nObjectives: To assess the discrepancy between current classifications in the diagnoses of septate uterus and to correlate them with reproductive outcomes; to detect 3D transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) additional measurements, which can better correlate small indentation lengths &gt;5 &lt;10mm to reproductive failures.\n\nMaterial and methods: Observational study enrolling 664 women of reproductive age with 3D ultrasound diagnosis of an indentation length \u22653mm. For each patient a detailed reproductive history was taken before performing 3D transvaginal examination. Patients with previous uterine surgery or metroplasty were excluded.\n\nMain Outcome Measure(s): Indentation lengths &gt;5 &lt;10mm showed high discrepancy in the diagnosis of uterine septum between different classifications. For these small indentations additional 3D measurements (indentation angle, septal width and septal length\/ fundal myometrial thickness (L\/M) ratio) were correlated to infertility and recurrent miscarriage.\n\nResults: Among the cohort, 215 patients showed an indentation length &gt;5 &lt;10mm; 136 tried to conceive: 69 (51%) were infertile, 38 (28%) had recurrent miscarriages (\u22652) and 5 (4%) had at least one delivery. Recurrent miscarriage significantly correlated to an indentation angle &gt;134\u00b0; whereas infertility to an indentation width &lt;32mm and a L\/M ratio &gt;75%.\n\nConclusions: Wide discrepancies between different classifications are more evident in indentation lengths &gt;5 &lt;10mm. Additional measurements on 3D coronal section may help to evaluate the risk of infertility or recurrent miscarriage.\n\nWhat is new? Additional 3D TVS measurements, beyond septal lengths, in particular for small fundal indentation, may help in predicting the risk of developing adverse reproductive outcomes.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.52054\/fvvo.14.2.025","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2022,7,2]],"date-time":"2022-07-02T08:21:44Z","timestamp":1656750104000},"page":"129-138","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":4,"title":["3D transvaginal ultrasound diagnosis of uterine septa according to different classifications: are there other measurements that correlate to reproductive outcome in small indentation length?"],"prefix":"10.52054","volume":"14","author":[{"given":"C","family":"Russo","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"F","family":"Conway","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"T","family":"Siciliano","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"A","family":"Selntigia","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"F","family":"Giuseppe Martire","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"G","family":"Soreca","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"C","family":"Ticconi","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"C","family":"Exacoustos","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"2811","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2022,7,1]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref0","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Alvero R, Burney RO, Khorshid A et al. Surgical treatment of uterine septum to improve reproductive outcomes - resect or not? Fertil Steril. 2021;116:298-305.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2021.06.009"},{"key":"ref1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Bermejo C, Mart\u00ednez Ten P, Cantarero R et al. Three-dimensional ultrasound in the diagnosis of M\u00fcllerian duct anomalies and concordance with magnetic resonance imaging. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010;35:593-601.","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.7551"},{"key":"ref2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Buttram VC Jr, Gibbons WE. M\u00fcllerian anomalies: a proposed classification. (An analysis of 144 cases). Fertil Steril. 1979;32:40-6.","DOI":"10.1016\/s0015-0282(16)44114-2"},{"key":"ref3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Chan YY, Jayaprakasan K, Tan A et al. Reproductive outcomes in women with congenital uterine anomalies: a systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;38:371-82.","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.10056"},{"key":"ref4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Detti L, Peregrin-Alvarez I, Roman RA et al. A comparison of four systems for uterine septum diagnosis and indication for surgical correction. Minerva Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Jun;73:376-83.","DOI":"10.23736\/s2724-606x.21.04789-4"},{"key":"ref5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Donnez J. Arcuate uterus: a legitimate pathological entity? Fertil Steril. 2018;109:610.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2018.01.044"},{"key":"ref6","unstructured":"Duckitt K, Qureshi A. Recurrent miscarriage. BMJ Clin Evid. 2011; 2011:1409."},{"key":"ref7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Exacoustos C, Cobuzzi I, Romeo V. 2D Ultrasound (2D US) and Sonohysterography (SHG) for the Diagnosis of Female Genital Anomalies. 2015.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-1-4471-5146-3_6"},{"key":"ref8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Gergolet M, Campo R, Verdenik I et al. No clinical relevance of the height of fundal indentation in subseptate or arcuate uterus: a prospective study. Reprod Biomed Online. 2012;24:576-82.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rbmo.2012.01.025"},{"key":"ref9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Ghi T, Casadio P, Kuleva M et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound in diagnosis and classification of congenital uterine anomalies. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:808-13.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2008.05.086"},{"key":"ref10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Graupera B, Pascual MA, Hereter L et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound compared with magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of M\u00fcllerian duct anomalies using ESHRE-ESGE consensus on the classification of congenital anomalies of the female genital tract. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46:616-22.","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.14825"},{"key":"ref11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Grimbizis GF, Camus M, Tarlatzis BC et al. Clinical implications of uterine malformations and hysteroscopic treatment results. Hum Reprod Update. 2001;7:161-74.","DOI":"10.1093\/humupd\/7.2.161"},{"key":"ref12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Grimbizis GF, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Saravelos SH et al. The Thessaloniki ESHRE\/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies. Gynecol Surg. 2016;13:1-16.","DOI":"10.1007\/s10397-015-0909-1"},{"key":"ref13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Grimbizis GF, Gordts S, Di Spiezio Sardo A et al. The ESHRE-ESGE consensus on the classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies. Gynecol Surg. 2013;10:199-212.","DOI":"10.1007\/s10397-013-0800-x"},{"key":"ref14","unstructured":"Hendriks E, Rosenberg R, Prine L. Ectopic Pregnancy: Diagnosis and Management. Am Fam Physician. 2020;101:599-606."},{"key":"ref15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Knez J, Saridogan E, Van Den Bosch T et al. ESHRE\/ESGE female genital tract anomalies classification system-the potential impact of discarding arcuate uterus on clinical practice. Hum Reprod. 2018;33:600-6.","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/dey043"},{"key":"ref16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Kupesic S. Clinical implications of sonographic detection of uterine anomalies for reproductive outcome.Ultrasound Gynecol 2001;18:387-400.","DOI":"10.1046\/j.0960-7692.2001.00539.x"},{"key":"ref17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Ludwin A, Ludwin I. Comparison of the ESHRE-ESGE and ASRM classifications of Mullerian duct anomalies in everyday practice. Hum Reprod 2015;30:569\u201380.","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/deu344"},{"key":"ref18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Ludwin A, Martins WP, Bhagavath B et al. Overdiagnosis, overdetection, and overdefinition of the septate uterus: reexamination of the ASRM and ESHRE-ESGE criteria is urgently needed. Fertil Steril. 2019;112:448-9.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2019.05.026"},{"key":"ref19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Ludwin A, Martins WP, Nastri CO et al. Congenital Uterine Malformation by Experts (CUME): better criteria for distinguishing between normal\/arcuate and septate uterus? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;51:101-9.","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.18923"},{"key":"ref20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Ludwin A. Septum resection does not improve reproductive outcomes: truly? Hum Reprod. 2020;35:1495-8.","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/deaa142"},{"key":"ref21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Pfeifer SM, Attaran M, Goldstein J et al. ASRM m\u00fcllerian anomalies classification 2021. Fertil Steril. 2021 Nov;116:1238-52.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2021.09.025"},{"key":"ref22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Electronic address: ASRM@asrm.org; Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Uterine septum: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:530-40.","DOI":"10.4135\/9781412963855.n88"},{"key":"ref23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Definitions of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:63.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2012.09.023"},{"key":"ref24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Quinn JA, Munoz FM, Gonik B et al. Preterm birth: Case definition & guidelines for data collection, analysis, and presentation of immunisation safety data. Vaccine. 2016 1;34:6047-56.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.vaccine.2016.03.045"},{"key":"ref25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Salim R, Woelfer B, Backos M et al. Reproducibility of three-dimensional ultrasound diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2003;21:578- 82.","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.127"},{"key":"ref26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Saravelos SH, Cocksedge KA, Li TC. Prevalence and diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies in women with reproductive failure: a critical appraisal. Human Reprod Update 2008;14:415-29.","DOI":"10.1093\/humupd\/dmn018"},{"key":"ref27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Saridogan E, Mavrelos D, Jurkovic D. To decide on the value of hysteroscopic septum resection we need prospective data. Hum Reprod. 2020;35:2627.","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/deaa229"},{"key":"ref28","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Sim\u00f3n C, Martinez L, Pardo F et al. M\u00fcllerian defects in women with normal reproductive outcome. Fertil Steril. 1991;56:1192-3.","DOI":"10.1016\/S0015-0282(16)54741-4"},{"key":"ref29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Surrey ES, Katz-Jaffe M, Surrey RL et al. Arcuate uterus: is there an impact on in vitro fertilization outcomes after euploid embryo transfer? Fertil Steril. 2018;109:638-43.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2017.12.001"},{"key":"ref30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"The American Fertility Society classifications of adnexal adhesions, distal tubal occlusion, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, m\u00fcllerian anomalies and intrauterine adhesions. Fertil Steril. 1988;49:944-55.","DOI":"10.1016\/s0015-0282(16)59942-7"},{"key":"ref31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Van den Bosch T, Van Schoubroeck D, Alcazar JL et al. Importance of transient myometrial contractions in diagnosis of adenomyosis and congenital uterine anomalies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2021;57:651-3.","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.22036"}],"container-title":["Facts, Views and Vision in ObGyn"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,14]],"date-time":"2025-02-14T00:55:32Z","timestamp":1739494532000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/fvvo.eu\/articles\/doi\/FVVO.14.2.025"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2022,6,30]]},"references-count":32,"journal-issue":{"issue":"2","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2022,7,1]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2022,6,30]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.52054\/fvvo.14.2.025","relation":{},"ISSN":["2684-4230","2032-0418"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2684-4230","type":"electronic"},{"value":"2032-0418","type":"print"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2022,6,30]]}}}