Advertisement

Patients with Uterine Factor Infertility: General

  • Cesar Diaz GarciaEmail author
Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

Absolute uterine factor infertility (AUFI) refers to a type of infertility that is 100% attributable to the absence of a normal uterus, either anatomical or functional, which prevents the implantation of an embryo or the ability to carry a term pregnancy. Relative uterine factor infertility (RUFI) refers to uterine abnormalities whose presence can cause variable degrees of infertility or subfertility, although it is difficult to prove that such uterine abnormality is the major cause of infertility in each specific case. The group AUFI includes congenital pathologies such as uterine agenesis or hypoplasia and also acquired conditions such as hysterectomy post-partum or difficult-to-treat diseases like leiomyomas or neoplasia of the uterus. The group RUFI covers a broad spectrum of conditions in which the uterus is present, ranging from different degrees of uterine malformations to presence of conditions such as fibroids or even dysfunctional problems related to implantation failures.

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

References

  1. Al-Inany H. Intrauterine adhesions.An update. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2001;80(11):986–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bath LE, Critchley HO, Chambers SE, Anderson RA, Kelnar CJ, Wallace WH. Ovarian and uterine characteristics after total body irradiation in childhood and adolescence: response to sex steroid replacement. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999;106(12):1265–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bosch FX, Castellsague X, de Sanjose S. HPV and cervical cancer: screening or vaccination? Br J Cancer. 2008;98(1):15–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brett KM, Higgins JA. Hysterectomy prevalence by Hispanic ethnicity: evidence from a national survey. Am J Public Health. 2003;93(2):307–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bukulmez O, Yarali H, Gurgan T. Total corporal synechiae due to tuberculosis carry a very poor prognosis following hysteroscopic synechialysis. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(8):1960–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buttram VC Jr. Mullerian anomalies and their management. Fertil Steril. 1983;40(2):159–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Creasman WT, Odicino F, Maisonneuve P, Quinn MA, Beller U, Benedet JL, et al. Carcinoma of the corpus uteri. FIGO 26th annual report on the results of treatment in gynecological cancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2006;95(Suppl 1):S105–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Critchley HO, Wallace WH. Impact of cancer treatment on uterine function. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2005;34:64–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dargent D, Martin X, Sacchetoni A, Mathevet P. Laparoscopic vaginal radical trachelectomy: a treatment to preserve the fertility of cervical carcinoma patients. Cancer. 2000;88(8):1877–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Donnez J, Dolmans MM, Pellicer A, Diaz-Garcia C, Sanchez Serrano M, Schmidt KT, et al. Restoration of ovarian activity and pregnancy after transplantation of cryopreserved ovarian tissue: a review of 60 cases of reimplantation. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(6):1503–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Farquhar CM, Steiner CA. Hysterectomy rates in the United States 1990-1997. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;99(2):229–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Fatemi HM, Kasius JC, Timmermans A, van Disseldorp J, Fauser BC, Devroey P, et al. Prevalence of unsuspected uterine cavity abnormalities diagnosed by office hysteroscopy prior to in vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(8):1959–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fernandez H, Al-Najjar F, Chauveaud-Lambling A, Frydman R, Gervaise A. Fertility after treatment of Asherman’s syndrome stage 3 and 4. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2006;13(5):398–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Folch M, Pigem I, Konje JC. Mullerian agenesis: etiology, diagnosis, and management. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2000;55(10):644–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Friedler S, Margalioth EJ, Kafka I, Yaffe H. Incidence of post-abortion intra-uterine adhesions evaluated by hysteroscopy—a prospective study. Hum Reprod. 1993;8(3):442–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Galliano D, Bellver J, Diaz-Garcia C, Simon C, Pellicer A. ART and uterine pathology: how relevant is the maternal side for implantation? Hum Reprod Update. 2015;21(1):13–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Glaze S, Ekwalanga P, Roberts G, Lange I, Birch C, Rosengarten A, et al. Peripartum hysterectomy: 1999 to 2006. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(3):732–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Grimbizis GF, Camus M, Tarlatzis BC, Bontis JN, Devroey P. Clinical implications of uterine malformations and hysteroscopic treatment results. Hum Reprod Update. 2001;7(2):161–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hart R, Khalaf Y, Yeong CT, Bickerstaff H, Lawson R, Taylor A, et al. Prospective controlled study of the effect of uterine fibroids on the outcome of assisted conception cycles. Fertil Steril. 2000;74(3):S111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heinonen PK, Saarikoski S, Pystynen P. Reproductive performance of women with uterine anomalies.An evaluation of 182 cases. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1982;61(2):157–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Holm K, Nysom K, Brocks V, Hertz H, Jacobsen N, Muller J. Ultrasound B-mode changes in the uterus and ovaries and Doppler changes in the uterus after total body irradiation and allogeneic bone marrow transplantation in childhood. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1999;23(3):259–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Homer HA, Li TC, Cooke ID. The septate uterus: a review of management and reproductive outcome. Fertil Steril. 2000;73(1):1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kirk EP, Chuong CJ, Coulam CB, Williams TJ. Pregnancy after metroplasty for uterine anomalies. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1994;49(2):81–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kwee A, Bots ML, Visser GH, Bruinse HW. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy: a prospective study in the Netherlands. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2006;124(2):187–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Larsen EC, Schmiegelow K, Rechnitzer C, Loft A, Muller J, Andersen AN. Radiotherapy at a young age reduces uterine volume of childhood cancer survivors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2004;83(1):96–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Marshall LM, Spiegelman D, Barbieri RL, Goldman MB, Manson JE, Colditz GA, et al. Variation in the incidence of uterine leiomyoma among premenopausal women by age and race. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;90(6):967–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Papp Z, Mezei G, Gavai M, Hupuczi P, Urbancsek J. Reproductive performance after transabdominal metroplasty: a review of 157 consecutive cases. J Reprod Med. 2006;51(7):544–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Quinn MA, Benedet JL, Odicino F, Maisonneuve P, Beller U, Creasman WT, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix uteri. FIGO 26th annual report on the results of treatment in gynecological cancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2006;95(Suppl 1):S43–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Raga F, Bauset C, Remohi J, Bonilla-Musoles F, Simon C, Pellicer A. Reproductive impact of congenital Mullerian anomalies. Hum Reprod. 1997;12(10):2277–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ruiz-Alonso M, Blesa D, Diaz-Gimeno P, Gomez E, Fernandez-Sanchez M, Carranza F, et al. The endometrial receptivity array for diagnosis and personalized embryo transfer as a treatment for patients with repeated implantation failure. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(3):818–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ruiz-Alonso M, Galindo N, Pellicer A, Simon C. What a difference two days make: “personalized” embryo transfer (pET) paradigm: a case report and pilot study. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(6):1244–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Saravelos SH, Cocksedge KA, Li TC. Prevalence and diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies in women with reproductive failure: a critical appraisal. Hum Reprod Update. 2008;14(5):415–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schenker JG, Margalioth EJ. Intrauterine adhesions: an updated appraisal. Fertil Steril. 1982;37(5):593–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shokeir TA, Fawzy M, Tatongy M. The nature of intrauterine adhesions following reproductive hysteroscopic surgery as determined by early and late follow-up hysteroscopy: clinical implications. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2008;277(5):423–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sieunarine K, Zakaria FB, Boyle DC, Corless DJ, Noakes DE, Lindsay I, et al. Possibilities for fertility restoration: a new surgical technique. Int Surg. 2005;90(5):249–56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Sonoda T. [Risk factors and prevention of uterine corpus cancer]. Nihon Rinsho. 2004;62 Suppl 10:422–8.Google Scholar
  37. Sunkara SK, Khairy M, El-Toukhy T, Khalaf Y, Coomarasamy A. The effect of intramural fibroids without uterine cavity involvement on the outcome of IVF treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2009;25(2):418–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Taylor E, Gomel V. The uterus and fertility. Fertil Steril. 2008;89(1):1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ungar L, Palfalvi L, Hogg R, Siklos P, Boyle DC, Del Priore G, et al. Abdominal radical trachelectomy: a fertility-preserving option for women with early cervical cancer. BJOG. 2005;112(3):366–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vernaeve V, Bodri D, Colodron M, Vidal R, Durban M, Coll O. Endometrial receptivity after oocyte donation in recipients with a history of chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(11):2863–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wallace WH, Thomson AB, Saran F, Kelsey TW. Predicting age of ovarian failure after radiation to a field that includes the ovaries. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;62(3):738–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IVI-London, IVI-RMA GlobalLondonUK

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options