Impact of Congenital Uterine Anomalies on Reproductive Outcomes of IVF/ICSI-embryo Transfer: a Retrospective Study

Overview

Journal Eur J Med Res

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2024 Jan 11

PMID 38212852

Authors

Jia Kang

Jie Qiao

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To study the impact of congenital uterine anomalies on reproductive outcomes after in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)-embryo transfer (ET).

Methods: A retrospective study including a total of 865women with congenital uterine anomalies and 865 age and admission time matched controls who underwent the first IVF/ICSI-ET cycle between January 2010 and December 2019 was conducted. Women with uterine anomalies were classified into canalization defect (complete septate uterus and subseptate uterus) and unification defect (unicornuate uterus, bicornuate uterus, and didelphus uterus) according to the processes of abnormal embryological development. Control women were selected by age (± 1.0 year) and admission time (± 6 months) matched with a 1:1 ratio. The reproductive outcomes were compared between women with uterine anomalies and the controls. The primary outcome was live birth; secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, preterm delivery, and spontaneous pregnancy loss.

Results: Compared with women with a normal uterus, women with canalization defects were less likely to experience live birth [84/332 (25.3%) vs 128/332 (38.6%), RR: 0.647, 95% CI 0.513-0.815, P < 0.001]. They also had a lower clinical pregnancy rate [126/332 (38.0%) vs 206/332 (62.0%), RR: 0.829, 95% CI 0.690-0.997, P = 0.046] and experienced a higher first-trimester pregnancy loss rate [25/126 (19.8%) vs 11/206 (5.3%), RR: 2.716, 95% CI 1.393-5.295, P = 0.003]. Compared with women with a normal uterus, women with a unification defect were also less likely to experience live birth [132/533 (24.8%) vs 219/533 (41.1%), RR: 0.713, 95% CI 0.586-0.868, P = 0.001]. Women with a unification defect had lower clinical pregnancy rates [182/533 (34.1%) vs 263/533 (49.1%), RR: 0.813, 95% CI 0.695-0.952, P = 0.010] and increased first-trimester pregnancy loss [36/182 (19.8%) vs 20/263 (7.6%), RR: 3.288, 95% CI 1.776-6.085, P < 0.001]. While uterine anomaly seemed not increase the risk of preterm birth, ectopic pregnancy and second-trimester pregnancy loss.

Conclusions: Both canalization defects and unification defects were associated with lower fertility outcomes, including lower live birth rates, lower clinical pregnancy rates, and higher early miscarriage rates.

Citing Articles

Uterus didelphys: the first case report on molecular profiling of endometrial tissue from both uterine cavities.

Sola-Leyva A, Romero B, Canha-Gouveia A, Perez-Prieto I, Molina N, Vargas E Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2025; 23(1):1.

PMID: 39755646 PMC: 11699791. DOI: 10.1186/s12958-024-01330-7.

References

Woelfer B, Salim R, Banerjee S, Elson J, Regan L, Jurkovic D . Reproductive outcomes in women with congenital uterine anomalies detected by three-dimensional ultrasound screening. Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 98(6):1099-103. DOI: 10.1016/s0029-7844(01)01599-x. View

Yang R, Niu Z, Chen L, Liu P, Li R, Qiao J . Analysis of related factors affecting cumulative live birth rates of the first ovarian hyperstimulation in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycle: a population-based study from 17,978 women in China. Chin Med J (Engl). 2021; 134(12):1405-1415. PMC: 8213303. DOI: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000001586. View

Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson G, Dyer S, Racowsky C, de Mouzon J, Sokol R . The International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility Care, 2017. Fertil Steril. 2017; 108(3):393-406. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.06.005. View

Fox N, Roman A, Stern E, Gerber R, Saltzman D, Rebarber A . Type of congenital uterine anomaly and adverse pregnancy outcomes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013; 27(9):949-53. DOI: 10.3109/14767058.2013.847082. View

Ozgur K, Bulut H, Berkkanoglu M, Coetzee K . Reproductive outcomes of IVF patients with unicornuate uteri. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017; 34(3):312-318. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2016.12.013. View

Chan Y, Jayaprakasan K, Zamora J, Thornton J, 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(6):761-71. PMC: 3191936. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmr028. View

. Uterine septum: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2016; 106(3):530-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.05.014. View

Chen Y, Nisenblat V, Yang P, Zhang X, Ma C . Reproductive outcomes in women with unicornuate uterus undergoing in vitro fertilization: a nested case-control retrospective study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2018; 16(1):64. PMC: 6034283. DOI: 10.1186/s12958-018-0382-6. View

Salim R, Woelfer B, Backos M, Regan L, Jurkovic D . Reproducibility of three-dimensional ultrasound diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 21(6):578-82. DOI: 10.1002/uog.127. View

10.

Qiu J, Du T, Chen C, Lyu Q, Mol B, Zhao M . Impact of uterine malformations on pregnancy and neonatal outcomes of IVF/ICSI-frozen embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2022; 37(3):428-446. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deac003. View

11.

Pfeifer S, Attaran M, Goldstein J, Lindheim S, Petrozza J, Rackow B . ASRM müllerian anomalies classification 2021. Fertil Steril. 2021; 116(5):1238-1252. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.09.025. View

12.

Tomazevic T, Ban-Frangez H, Virant-Klun I, Verdenik I, Pozlep B, Vrtacnik-Bokal E . Septate, subseptate and arcuate uterus decrease pregnancy and live birth rates in IVF/ICSI. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010; 21(5):700-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.06.028. View

13.

Ban-Frangez H, Tomazevic T, Virant-Klun I, Verdenik I, Ribic-Pucelj M, -Bokal E . The outcome of singleton pregnancies after IVF/ICSI in women before and after hysteroscopic resection of a uterine septum compared to normal controls. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2008; 146(2):184-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2008.04.010. View

14.

Surrey E, Katz-Jaffe M, Surrey R, Small A, Gustofson R, Schoolcraft W . Arcuate uterus: is there an impact on in vitro fertilization outcomes after euploid embryo transfer?. Fertil Steril. 2018; 109(4):638-643. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.12.001. View

15.

Leible S, Munoz H, Walton R, Sabaj V, Cumsille F, Sepulveda W . Uterine artery blood flow velocity waveforms in pregnant women with müllerian duct anomaly: a biologic model for uteroplacental insufficiency. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998; 178(5):1048-53. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9378(98)70546-0. View

16.

Panagiotopoulos M, Tseke P, Michala L . 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. Obstet Gynecol. 2021; 139(1):138-148. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004627. View

17.

Cai P, Ouyang Y, Lin G, Peng Y, Qin J, Li X . Pregnancy outcome after in-vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection in women with congenital uterus didelphys. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2021; 59(4):543-549. DOI: 10.1002/uog.24750. View

18.

. The American Fertility Society classifications of adnexal adhesions, distal tubal occlusion, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, müllerian anomalies and intrauterine adhesions. Fertil Steril. 1988; 49(6):944-55. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)59942-7. View

19.

Prior M, Richardson A, Asif S, Polanski L, Parris-Larkin M, Chandler J . Outcome of assisted reproduction in women with congenital uterine anomalies: a prospective observational study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 51(1):110-117. DOI: 10.1002/uog.18935. View

20.

Li X, Ouyang Y, Yi Y, Lin G, Lu G, Gong F . Pregnancy outcomes of women with a congenital unicornuate uterus after IVF-embryo transfer. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017; 35(5):583-591. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.07.015. View