Clinical and anamnestic data and morphofunctional characteristics of the endometrium in women with uterine developmental anomalies

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Uterine developmental anomalies have a negative impact on the implementation of female reproductive function, leading to a high risk of reproductive failures, premature birth, placental insufficiency, intrauterine growth retardation syndrome, labor anomalies and postpartum bleeding. The presence of both structural anomalies themselves and the high frequency of reproductive failures leads to repeated intrauterine interventions, which are considered as a premorbid background for the endometrial pathology development. Despite the combined causes of reproductive failure, morphological studies of the endometrium in women with various uterine anomalies are scarce.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and anamnestic data and morphological characteristics of the endometrium in women with uterine anomalies and reproductive failures in the anamnesis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined 123 women with uterine developmental anomalies (49 patients with an arcuate uterus, 38 patients with a uterine septum, 16 patients with a bicornuate uterus, 10 patients with an unicornuate uterus, 10 patients with dimetria). Standard clinical and laboratory work-up, hysteroscopy with endometrial biopsy and laparoscopy were performed in all patients. Histological and immunohistochemical examination of the endometrium was carried out according to the standard technique with assessment of the relevant receptor profile (estrogen and progesterone receptors) and pro-inflammatory markers (CD8+, CD20+, CD4+, and CD138+).

RESULTS: Clinical and anamnestic data evaluation in patients with uterine anomalies revealed menstrual abnormalities, commonly, dysmenorrhea. Regardless of the type of uterine anomaly, a high incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease, endometriosis and a high frequency of reproductive failures were found. The morphological structure of the endometrium with uterine anomalies was characterized by a higher frequency of endometrial hyperplasia, impaired secretory transformation and the presence of chronic endometritis.

CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a variety of uterine developmental anomalies are characterized by menstrual irregularities, a high incidence of gynecological pathology and reproductive failures. There is no association between pathognomonic signs of endometrial morphofunctional abnormalities and the type of uterine anomaly; however, they are similar to those seen in recurrent miscarriages and infertility of various origins.

About the authors

Ekaterina V. Kazantseva

The Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott

Author for correspondence.
Email: katrin8505@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4948-4125

MD, Post-Graduate Student

Russian Federation, 3 Mendeleevskaya line, Saint Petersburg, 199034

Tatyana G. Tral

The Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott

Email: ttg.tral@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8948-4811
SPIN-code: 1244-9631
Scopus Author ID: 37666260400

MD, PhD

Russian Federation, 3 Mendeleevskaya line, Saint Petersburg, 199034

Gulrukhsor Kh. Tolibova

The Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott; North-Western State Medical University named after I.I. Mechnikov

Email: gulyatolibova@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6216-6220
SPIN-code: 7544-4825
Scopus Author ID: 23111355700
ResearcherId: Y-6671-2018

MD, PhD, DSci (Medicine)

Russian Federation, 3 Mendeleevskaya line, Saint Petersburg, 199034; Saint Petersburg

References

  1. Ludwin A, Ludwin I, Kudla M, Kottner J. Reliability of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy and American Society for Reproductive Medicine classification systems for congenital uterine anomalies detected using three-dimensional ultrasonography. Fertil Steril. 2015;104(3):688–697. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.06.019
  2. Grimbizis GF, Gordts S, Di Spiezio Sardo A, et al. The ESHRE-ESGE consensus on the classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies. Gynecol Surg. 2013;10(3):199–212. doi: 10.1007/s10397-013-0800-x
  3. Adamyan LV, Hashukoeva AZ, Kulakov VI. Poroki razvitiya matki I vlagalischa. Moscow: Medicina; 1998. (In Russ.)
  4. Safronov OV, Briukhina EV, Ishchenko LS, et al. Current classification systems and methodological approaches in the diagnosis of uterine malformations. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2019;(3):18–24. (In Russ.). doi: 10.18565/aig.2019.3.18-24
  5. Kozachenko IF, Arakelyan AS, Smolnikova VYu, Adamyan LV. The role of minimally invasive intrauterine interventions in increasing the effectiveness of IVF programs. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2020;(9):97–104. (In Russ.). doi: 10.18565/aig.2020.9.97-104
  6. Robbins J, Broadwell С, Chow L, Parry J, Sadowski E. Müllerian duct anomalies: embryological development, classification, and MRI assessment. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;41(1):1–12. doi: 10.1002/jmri.24771
  7. Adamyan LV, Kurilo LF, Glibina TM, et al. Anomalii razvitiya jenskih polovih organov: novii vzglyad na morfogenez. Problemi reprodukcii. 2009;15(4):10–19. (In Russ.)
  8. Bhagavath B, Ellie G, Griffiths KM, Winter T, Alur-Gupta S, Richardson C, Lindheim SR. Uterine malformations: An update of diagnosis, management, and outcomes. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2017;72(6):377–392. doi: 10.1097/OGX.0000000000000444
  9. Rackow BW, Arici A. Reproductive performance of women with müllerian anomalies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2007;19(3):229–237. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e32814b0649
  10. Fedele L, Bianchi S, Frontino G. Septums and synechiae: approaches to surgical correction. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2006;19(49):767–788. doi: 10.1097/01.grf.0000211948.36465.a6
  11. Devi Wold AS, Pham N, Arici A. Anatomic factors in recurrent pregnancy loss. Semin Reprod Med. 2006;24(1):25–32. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-931798
  12. 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(4):371–382. doi: 10.1002/uog.10056
  13. Prior M, Richardson A, Asif S, et al. Outcome of assisted reproduction in women with congenital uterine anomalies: a prospective observational study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;51(1):110–117. doi: 10.1002/uog.18935
  14. Tolibova GH, Tral’ TG, Kogan IJu, et al. Molekuljarnye aspekty jendometrial’noj disfunkcii. In: Pal’cev MA, Kvetnoj IM, Poljakova VO. et al. Molekuljarnaja morfologija. Metodologicheskie i prikladnye aspekty nejroimmunojendokrinologii. Moscow: SHIKO; 2015. P. 239–252. (In Russ.)
  15. Farhat KN. Anomalii matki i vlagalishcha v sochetanii s endometriozom: hirurgicheskoe lechenie i reabilitaciya. [dissertation]. Moscow; 2018. (In Russ.)
  16. Epelman M, Dinan D, Gee MS, et al. Müllerian duct and related anomalies in children and adolescents. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2013;21(4):773–789. doi: 10.1016/j.mric.2013.04.011
  17. Demir A, Dilbaz B, Karadag B, Duraker R. Coexistence of endometriosis and uterine septum in patients with abortion or infertility. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2011;37(11):1596–1600. doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2011.01581.x
  18. Kupesic S. Clinical implications of sonographic detection of uterine anomalies for reproductive outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001;18(1):387–400. doi: 10.1046/j.0960-7692.2001.00539.x
  19. Letterie G. Management of congenital uterine abnormalities. Reprod Biomed Online. 2011;23(1):40–52. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.02.008
  20. Abrao MS, Muzii L, Marana R. Anatomical causes of female infertility and their management. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2013;123(2):18–24. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.09.008
  21. Lekovich J, Stewart J, Anderson S, et al. Placental malperfusion as a possible mechanism of preterm birth in patients with Müllerian anomalies. J Perinat Med. 2017;45(1):45–49. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2016-0075
  22. Sidelnikova VM. Miscarriage: the present view of the problem. Rossiiskii vestnik akushera-ginekologa. 2007;(2):62–64. (In Russ.)
  23. Aylamazyan EK, Tolibova GKh, Tral TG, et al. New approaches to the estimation of endometrial dysfunction. Journal of obstetrics and women’s diseases. 2017;66(3):8–15. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17816/JOWD6638-15
  24. Gashenko VO, Danilov AYu, Kogan EA, Adamyan LV. Peculiarities of expression of endometrium receptivity markers in patients with intrauterine septum. Reproduktivnoe zdorov’e detej i podrostkov. 2012;(2):28–36. (In Russ.)

Copyright (c) 2021 Eсо-Vector



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies