Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2022 Jan 1;139(1):138-148.
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004627.

Obstetric Complications in Women With Congenital Uterine Anomalies According to the 2013 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy Classification: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Michail Panagiotopoulos  1 , Paraskevi Tseke, Lina Michala
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Obstetric Complications in Women With Congenital Uterine Anomalies According to the 2013 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy Classification: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Michail Panagiotopoulos et al. Obstet Gynecol. .

Abstract

Objective: To assess the risk for obstetric complications in women with congenital uterine anomalies and the risk in each main class of uterine anomaly (U2 [septate], U3 [bicorporeal], U4 [hemi-uterus]), based on the 2013 classification by the ESHRE (European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology) and the ESGE (European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy).

Data sources: MEDLINE, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception until January 2021. The reference list of all included articles and previous systematic reviews were also screened to identify potential additional articles.

Methods of study selection: Comparative and noncomparative studies that investigated the obstetric outcomes of women with any type of known congenital uterine anomaly were considered eligible for inclusion. Screening and eligibility assessment was performed independently by two reviewers.

Tabulation, integration, and results: Forty-seven studies were included. The quality of included comparative studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Odds ratios (ORs), pooled proportions of each obstetric outcome, and 95% CIs were calculated in RevMan and Stata accordingly, using random effects models. Congenital uterine anomalies were associated with increased risk of preterm birth (OR 3.89, 95% CI 3.11-4.88); cervical insufficiency (OR 15.13, 95% CI 11.74-19.50); prelabor rupture of membranes (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.38-4.48); fetal malpresentation (OR 11.11, 95% CI 5.74-21.49); fetal growth restriction (OR 3.75, 95% CI 1.88-7.46); placental abruption (OR 5.21, 95% CI 3.34-8.13); placenta previa (OR 4.00, 95% CI 1.87-8.56); placental retention (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.16-2.52); and cesarean birth (OR 4.52, 95% CI 2.19-9.31); when compared with those without anomalies. Pooled estimated risks were 25% for preterm birth, 40% for fetal malpresentation, 64% for cesarean birth, 12% for prelabor rupture of membranes, 15% for fetal growth restriction, 4% for placental abruption, 5% for preeclampsia, 13% for cervical insufficiency, and 2% for placenta previa. Classes U2 (septate), U3 (bicorporeal), and U4 (hemi-uterus) were also associated independently with preterm birth, fetal malpresentation, cesarean birth, and placental abruption.

Conclusion: Congenital uterine anomalies are associated with obstetric complications across all examined ESHRE and ESGE classifications.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, CRD42021244487.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Financial Disclosure The authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest.

References

    1. Cunningham FG, Leveno KJ, Bloom SL, Dashe JS, Hoffman BL, Casey BM, et al. Williams obstetrics, 25th ed. McGraw-Hill Education; 2018.
    1. 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;17:761–71. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmr028 - DOI
    1. Chan YY, Jayaprakasan K, Tan A, Thornton JG, Coomarasamy A, Raine-Fenning NJ. Reproductive outcomes in women with congenital uterine anomalies: a systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011;38:371–82. doi: 10.1002/uog.10056 - DOI
    1. 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. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.09.006 - DOI
    1. Acien P, Acien MI. The history of female genital tract malformation classifications and proposal of an updated system. Hum Reprod Update 2011;17:693–705. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmr021 - DOI

Supplementary concepts