Advertisement

Uterine Fehlbildungen

  • Thomas RömerEmail author
  • Frank Nawroth
Chapter
Part of the Springer Reference Medizin book series (SRM)

Zusammenfassung

Bei Patientinnen mit Kinderwunsch und habituellen Aborten sollte immer nach Uterusfehlbildungen gefahndet werden. Für die Klassifikation der Uterusfehlbildungen hat sich die AFS-Klassifikation bewährt. Die Kombination aus Hysteroskopie und Laparoskopie gilt als Goldstandard zur Diagnostik von Uterusfehlbildungen. Bei Uterusfehlbildungen ist immer nach assoziierten Fehlbildungen im Genitaltrakt (Vagina, Cervix) und Nieren- und Harnleiterfehlbildungen zu suchen. Beim Uterus unicornis mit einem nichtkommunizierenden Horn mit Endometrium ist eine laparoskopische Resektion zu empfehlen. Beim Uterus bicornis ist die Abort- und Frühgeburtenrate erhöht, sodass bei Patientinnen mit habituellen Aborten oder einer Hämatometra mit Beschwerden eine operative Korrektur notwendig ist (abdominale oder laparoskopische Metroplastik). Der Uterus subseptus ist die häufigste Fehlbildung. Es kann hier großzügig die Indikation zur Septumdissektion gestellt werden. Die Abortraten werden dadurch reduziert.

Literatur

  1. Akar ME, Bayar D, Yildiz S, Ozel M, Yilmaz Z (2005) Reproductive outcome of women with unicornuate uterus. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 45:148–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alborzi S, Asefjah H, Amini M, Vafaei H, Madadi G, Chubak N, Tavana Z (2015) Laparoscopic metroplasty in bicornuate and didelphic uteri: feasibility and outcome. Arch Gynecol Obstet 291:1167–1171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Fertility Society – AFS (1988) The American Fertility Society classification of adnexal adhesions, distal tubal occlusion, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, Mullerian anomalies and intrauterine adhesions. Fertil Steril 49:944–955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Angell NF, Domingo J (2002) Uterine rupture at term after uncomplicated hysteroscopic metroplasty. Obstet Gynecol 100:1089–1099Google Scholar
  5. Appelman Z, Hazan Y, Hagay Z (2003) High prevalence of Müllerian anomalies diagnosed by ultrasound in women with polycystic ovaries. J Reprod Med 48:362–364PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Aubriot FX, Chapron C (2007) Diethylstilbestrol exposure in utero. Polemics about metroplasty. The pros. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 35:826–831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berkkanoglu M, Isikoglu M, Arici F, Ozgur K (2008) What is the best time to perform intracytoplasmic sperm injection/embryo transfer cycle after hysteroscopic surgery for an incomplete uterine septum? Fertil Steril 90:2112–2115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bermejo C, Martinez-Ten P, Ruiz-Lopez L, Estevez M, Gil MM (2017) Classification of uterine anomalies by 3-dimensional ultrasonography using ESHRE/ESGE criteria: interobserver variability. Reprod Sci 1.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1933719117725825PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bosteels J, Weyers S, D’Hooghe TM, Torrance H, Broekmans FJ, Chua SJ, Mol BWJ (2017) Anti-adhesion therapy following operative hysteroscopy for treatment of female subfertility. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (11):CD011110Google Scholar
  10. Brännström M (2015) Uterus transplantation. Curr Opin Transplant 20:621–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Braun P, Grau FV, Pons RM, Enguix DP (2005) Is hysterosalpingography able to diagnose all uterine malformations correctly? A retrospective study. Eur J Radiol 53:274–279Google Scholar
  12. Brucker SY, Gegusch M, Zubke W, Rall K, Gauwerky JF, Wallwiener D (2008) Neovagina creation in vaginal agenesis: development of a new laparoscopic Vecchietti-based procedure and optimized instruments in a prospective comparative interventional study in 101 patients. Fertil Steril 90:1940–1952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brucker SY, Brännström M, Taran FA, Nadalin S, Königsrainer A, Rall K, Schöller D, Henes M, Bösmüller H, Fend F, Nikolaou K, Notohamiprodjo M, Rosenberger P, Grasshoff C, Heim E, Krämer B, Reisenauer C, Hoopmann M, Kagan KO, Dahm-Kähler P, Kvarnström N, Wallwiener D (2017) Selecting living donors for uterus transplantation: lessons learned from two transplantations resulting in menstrual functionality and another attempt, aborted after organ retrieval. Arch Gynecol Obstet 21.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-017-4626-z. [Epub vor Druck]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe – DGGG (2010) Weibliche genitale Fehlbildungen. In: Leitlinien der Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Bd I. S. Kramarz, Berlin, S 31–89Google Scholar
  15. Fukunaga T, Fujii S, Inoue C, Mukuda N, Murakami A, Tanabe Y, Harada T, Ogawa T (2017) The spectrum of imaging appearances of Müllerian duct anomalies: focus on MR imaging. Jpn J Radiol 35:697–706PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grimbizis GF, Camus M, Tarlatzis BC, Bontis JN, Devroey P (2001) Clinical implications of uterine malformations and hysteroscopic treatment results. Hum Reprod Update 7:161–175PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Grünberger W (2006) Operative Korrektur kongenitaler Fehlbildungen. Frauenarzt 47:2Google Scholar
  18. Heinonen PK (1982) Longitudinal vaginal septum. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 13:253–258PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heinonen PK (2000) Clinical implications of the didelphic uterus: long-term follow-up of 49 cases. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 91:183–190PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Khalifa E, Toner JP, Jones HW Jr (1993) The role of abdominal metroplasty in the era of operative hysteroscopy. Surg Gynecol Obstet 176:208–212PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Kupesse S, Kurjah A (1998) Septate uterus defection and prediction of obstetrical complication by different forms of ultrasonography. J Ultrasound Med 17:631–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ledig S, Tewes AC, Hucke J, Römer T, Kapczuk K, Schippert C, Hillemanns P, Wieacker P (2017) Array-CGH analysis in patients with Müllerian fusion anomalies. Clin Genet 25.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cge.13160. [Epub vor Druck]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ludwin A, Martins WP, Nastri CO, Ludwin I, Coelho Neto MA, Leitao VM, Acien M, Alcazar JL, Benacerraf B, Condous G, De Wilde RL, Emanuel MH, Gibbons W, Guerriero S, Hurd WW, Levine D, Lindheim S, Pellicer A, Petraglia F, Saridogan E (2018) Congenital Uterine Malformations by Experts (CUME): better criteria for distinguishing between normal/arcuate and septate uterus? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 51:101–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Millischer AE, Grevent D, Rousseau V, O’Gorman N, Sonigo P, Bessieres B, Ville Y, Boddaert N, Salomon LJ (2017) Fetal MRI compared with ultrasound for the diagnosis of obstructive genital malformations. Prenat Diagn 37:1138–1145PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mollo A, De Franciscis P, Colacurci N, Cobellis L, Perino A, Venezia R, Alviggi C, De Placido G (2008) Hysteroscopic resection of the septum improves the pregnancy rate of women with unexplained infertility: a prospective controlled trial. Fertil Steril 91:2628–2631PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Nahum GG (1998) Uterine anomalies. How common are they, and what is their distribution among subtypes? J Reprod Med 43:877–887PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Nawroth F, Rahimi G, Nawroth C, Foth D, Ludwig M, Schmidt T (2006) Is there an association between septate uterus and endometriosis? Hum Reprod 21:542–544PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Oppelt P, Renner SP, Brucker S, Strissel PL, Strick R, Oppelt PG, Doerr HG, Schott HG, Schott GE, Hucke J, Wallwiener D, Beckmann MW (2005) The VCUAM (Vagina Cervix Uterus Adnex-associeted Malformation) classification: a new classification for genital malformations. Fertil Steril 84:1493–1497PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Oppelt P, von Have M, Paulsen M, Strissel PL, Strick R, Brucker S, Wallwiener D, Beckmann MW (2007) Female genital malformations and their associated abnormalities. Fertil Steril 87:335–342PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ozgur K, Bulut H, Berkkanoglu M, Coetzee K (2017) Reproductive outcomes of IVF patients with unicornuate uteri. Reprod Biomed Online 34:312–318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Prior M, Richardson A, Asif S, Polanski L, Parris-Larkin M, Chandler J, Fogg L, Jassal P, Thornton JG, Raine-Fenning NJ (2018) Outcome of assisted reproduction in women with congenital uterine anomalies: a prospective observational study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 51:110–117PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Raga F, Bauset C, Remohi J, Bonilla-Musoles F, Simón C, Pellicer A (1998) Reproductive impact of congenital Müllerian anomalies. Hum Reprod 12:2277–2281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rikken JF, Kowalik CR, Emanuel MH, Mol BW, Van der Veen F, van Wely M, Goddijn M (2017) Septum resection for women of reproductive age with a septate uterus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (1):CD008576Google Scholar
  34. Römer T (2009) Operative Hysteroskopie, 2. Aufl. de Gruyter, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Römer T (2010) Uterine Fehlbildungen. In: Ludwig M (Hrsg) Gynäkologische Endokrinologie und Reproduktionsmedizin. Marseille, München, S 9–20Google Scholar
  36. Römer T (2011) Uterusfehlbildungen. de Gruyter, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Römer T, Lober R (1997) Hysteroscopic correction of a complete septate uterus using a balloon technique. Hum Reprod 12:478–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Römer T, Schmidt T, Foth D (2000) Pre- and postoperative hormonal treatment in patients with hysteroscopic surgery. Contrib Gynecol Obstet 20:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rózewicki S, Bielewicz W, Iwanicki M, Puchalski A (1992) Developmental anomalies of the uterus in a population of 3000 women with various causes of infertility. Ginekol Pol 63:515–517Google Scholar
  40. Saleem SN (2003) MR imaging diagnosis of uterovaginal anomalies: current state of the art. Radiographics 23:e13. Epub 2003 Jun 20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Saravelos SH, Cocksedge KA, Li TC (2008) Prevalence and diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies in women with reproductive failure: a critical appraisal. Hum Reprod Update 14:415–429PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tewes AC, Rall KK, Römer T, Hucke J, Kapczuk K, Brucker S, Wieacker P, Ledig S (2015) Variations in RBM8A and TBX6 are associated with disorders of the Müllerian ducts. Fertil Steril 103:1313–1318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tomazevic T, Ban-Frangez H, Ribic-Pucelj M, Premrusren T, Verdenik I (2007) Small uterine septum is an important risk variable for preterm birth. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 135:154–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ugur M, Turan C, Mungan T, Kuscu E, Senöz S, Agis HT, Gökmen O (1995) Endometriosis in association with Müllerian anomalies. Gynecol Obstet Investig 40:261–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Klinik für Gynäkologie und GeburtshilfeEvangelisches Klinikum Köln-WeyertalKölnDeutschland
  2. 2.Facharzt-Zentrum für Kinderwunsch, Pränatale Medizin, Endokrinologie und Osteologieamedes MVZ HamburgHamburgDeutschland

Personalised recommendations