62
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Thessaloniki ESHRE/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          What is the recommended diagnostic work-up of female genital anomalies according to the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE)/European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) system? The ESHRE/ESGE consensus for the diagnosis of female genital anomalies is presented. Accurate diagnosis of congenital anomalies still remains a clinical challenge due to the drawbacks of the previous classification systems and the non-systematic use of diagnostic methods with varying accuracy, with some of them quite inaccurate. Currently, a wide range of non-invasive diagnostic procedures are available, enriching the opportunity to accurately detect the anatomical status of the female genital tract, as well as a new objective and comprehensive classification system with well-described classes and sub-classes. The ESHRE/ESGE Congenital Uterine Anomalies (CONUTA) Working Group established an initiative with the goal of developing a consensus for the diagnosis of female genital anomalies. The CONUTA working group and imaging experts in the field have been appointed to run the project. The consensus is developed based on (1) evaluation of the currently available diagnostic methods and, more specifically, of their characteristics with the use of the experts panel consensus method and of their diagnostic accuracy performing a systematic review of evidence and (2) consensus for (a) the definition of where and how to measure uterine wall thickness and (b) the recommendations for the diagnostic work-up of female genital anomalies, based on the results of the previous evaluation procedure, with the use of the experts panel consensus method. Uterine wall thickness is defined as the distance between interostial line and external uterine profile at the midcoronal plane of the uterus; alternatively, if a coronal plane is not available, the mean anterior and posterior uterine wall thickness at the longitudinal plane could be used. Gynaecological examination and two-dimensional ultrasound (2D US) are recommended for the evaluation of asymptomatic women. Three-dimensional ultrasound (3D US) is recommended for the diagnosis of female genital anomalies in “symptomatic” patients belonging to high-risk groups for the presence of a female genital anomaly and in any asymptomatic woman suspected to have an anomaly from routine avaluation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endoscopic evaluation are recommended for the sub-group of patients with suspected complex anomalies or in diagnostic dilemmas. Adolescents with symptoms suggestive for the presence of a female genital anomaly should be thoroughly evaluated with 2D US, 3D US, MRI and endoscopy. The various diagnostic methods should be used in a proper way and evaluated by experts to avoid mis-, over- and underdiagnosis. The role of a combined ultrasound examination and outpatient hysteroscopy should be prospectively evaluated. It is a challenge for further research, based on diagnosis, to objectively evaluate the clinical consequences related to various degrees of uterine deformity.

          Related collections

          Most cited references57

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Book: not found

          Practical statistics for medical researched

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The ESHRE/ESGE consensus on the classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies.

            What classification system is more suitable for the accurate, clear, simple and related to the clinical management categorization of female genital anomalies?
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies in unselected and high-risk populations: a systematic review

              BACKGROUND The prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies in high-risk women is unclear, as several different diagnostic approaches have been applied to different groups of patients. This review aims to evaluate the prevalence of such anomalies in unselected populations and in women with infertility, including those undergoing IVF treatment, women with a history of miscarriage, women with infertility and recurrent miscarriage combined, and women with a history of preterm delivery. METHODS Searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane register were performed. Study selection and data extraction were conducted independently by two reviewers. Studies were grouped into those that used ‘optimal’ and ‘suboptimal’ tests for uterine anomalies. Meta-analyses were performed to establish the prevalence of uterine anomalies and their subtypes within the various populations. RESULTS We identified 94 observational studies comprising 89 861 women. The prevalence of uterine anomalies diagnosed by optimal tests was 5.5% [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.5–8.5] in the unselected population, 8.0% (95% CI, 5.3–12) in infertile women, 13.3% (95% CI, 8.9–20.0) in those with a history of miscarriage and 24.5% (95% CI, 18.3–32.8) in those with miscarriage and infertility. Arcuate uterus is most common in the unselected population (3.9%; 95% CI, 2.1–7.1), and its prevalence is not increased in high-risk groups. In contrast, septate uterus is the most common anomaly in high-risk populations. CONCLUSIONS Women with a history of miscarriage or miscarriage and infertility have higher prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies compared with the unselected population.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                grimbi@med.auth.gr , grigoris.grimbizis@gmail.com
                Journal
                Gynecol Surg
                Gynecol Surg
                Gynecological Surgery
                Springer Berlin Heidelberg (Berlin/Heidelberg )
                1613-2076
                1613-2084
                4 November 2015
                4 November 2015
                2016
                : 13
                : 1-16
                Affiliations
                [ ]Congenital Uterine Malformations (CONUTA) Common ESHRE/ESGE Working Group and Invited Experts, Leuven, Belgium
                [ ]1st Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Tsimiski 51 Street, 54623 Thessaloniki, Greece
                Article
                909
                10.1007/s10397-015-0909-1
                4753246
                26918000
                0b6f0b1b-7c00-499c-bed6-2bf02d93b27b
                © The Author(s) 2015

                Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

                History
                : 20 July 2015
                : 20 July 2015
                Categories
                Opinion
                Custom metadata
                © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                genital tract,female genital anomalies,mullerian anomalies,uterine anomalies,eshre/esge system,diagnosis,classification

                Comments

                Comment on this article