The prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies in unselected and high-risk populations: a systematic review
Open Access
- 24 June 2011
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Human Reproduction Update
- Vol. 17 (6), 761-771
- https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmr028
Abstract
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. 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. 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. Women with a history of miscarriage or miscarriage and infertility have higher prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies compared with the unselected population.Keywords
This publication has 134 references indexed in Scilit:
- Transvaginal Ultrasonography of the Cervix to Predict Preterm Birth in Women With Uterine AnomaliesObstetrics & Gynecology, 2005
- Is hysterosalpingography able to diagnose all uterine malformations correctly?A retrospective studyEuropean Journal of Radiology, 2005
- Hysteroscopy in the evaluation of patients with recurrent pregnancy loss: a cohort study in a primary care populationSurgical Endoscopy, 2004
- False-Normal Appearance of the Endometrium on Conventional Transvaginal SonographyAmerican Journal of Roentgenology, 2002
- Hysterosalpingo-contrast sonography (HyCoSy) using Echovist®-200 in the outpatient investigation of infertility patientsThe British Journal of Radiology, 1996
- A comparison of patient tolerance of hysterosalpingo‐contrast sonography (HyCoSy) with Echovist®‐200 and X‐ray hysterosalpingography for outpatient investigation of infertile womenUltrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 1996
- The value of hysteroscopy in elderly women prior to in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET): A comparative studyJournal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, 1990
- Estimated Prevalence of Müllerian AnomaliesActa Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 1988
- Hysteroscopy in an Ivf-Er Program: Clinical experience with 360 infertile patientsActa Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 1988
- Classification and radiographic features of uterine malformations: hysterosalpingographic studyThe British Journal of Radiology, 1978