CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 564Gynecological conditions and treatmentsReproductive System and PregnancyReproductive Health and Contraception

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reproductive outcomes in women with congenital uterine anomalies: a systematic review

Open access
Chan, Y. Y., Jayaprakasan, K., Tan, A., Thornton, J. G., Coomarasamy, A., Raine‐Fenning, N. J.·2011·Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
DOI 10.1002/uog.10056
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Congenital uterine anomalies are common but their effect on reproductive outcome is unclear. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the association between different types of congenital uterine anomaly and various reproductive outcomes. METHODS: Searches were performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale was used for quality assessment. Uterine defects were grouped into arcuate uteri, canalization defects (septate and subseptate uteri) and unification defects (unicornuate, bicornuate and didelphys uteri). Pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed using random effects models. RESULTS: We identified nine studies comprising 3805 women. Meta-analysis showed that arcuate uteri were associated with increased rates of second-trimester miscarriage (RR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.33-4.27, P = 0.003) and fetal malpresentation at delivery (RR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.54-4.18; P < 0.001). Canalization defects were associated with reduced clinical pregnancy rates (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.96; P = 0.009) and increased rates of first-trimester miscarriage (RR, 2.89; 95% CI; 2.02-4.14; P < 0.001), preterm birth (RR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.48-3.11; P < 0.001) and fetal malpresentation (RR, 6.24; 95% CI, 4.05-9.62; P < 0.001). Unification defects were associated with increased rates of preterm birth (RR, 2.97; 95% CI, 2.08-4.23; P < 0.001) and fetal malpresentation (RR, 3.87; 95% CI, 2.42-6.18; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Canalization defects reduce fertility and increase rates of miscarriage and preterm delivery. None of the unification defects reduces fertility but some are associated with miscarriage and preterm delivery. Arcuate uteri are specifically associated with second-trimester miscarriage. All uterine anomalies increase the chance of fetal malpresentation at delivery.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/uog.10056

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 65 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Tantini C, 1996, Influence of minimal septa in human gestational capacity, Ital J Gynaecol Obstet, 8, 25
  2. 2008, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan)
  3. Zupi E, 1996, Uterine anomalies prevalence and reproductive outcome in women undergoing diagnostic hysteroscopy, Gynaecol Endoscopy, 5, 147

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 563

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Chan, Y. Y., Jayaprakasan, K., Tan, A., Thornton, J. G., Coomarasamy, A., & Raine‐Fenning, N. J.
Affiliations
  • Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust (GB)
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • Birmingham Women's Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Chan, Y. Y.
ORCID
Venue
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-09-20
Volume
38
Issue
4
Pages
371-382
ISSN
  • 0960-7692 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-0705
DOI
10.1002/uog.10056
OpenAlex
W2147813481
Cited by
564
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 53 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 65 · 2020: 70 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 5
FWCI
3.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gynecological conditions and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Reproductive System and Pregnancy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
Keywords
congenital uterine anomalies, reproductive outcomes, arcuate uterus, septate uterus, subseptate uterus, unicornuate uterus, bicornuate uterus, uterus didelphys, miscarriage, preterm birth, fetal malpresentation, clinical pregnancy rate, fertility, reproductive endocrinology, infertility, pregnancy complications
MeSH terms
Abortion, Spontaneous, Female, Fertility, Humans, Labor Presentation, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Outcome, Risk Factors, Uterine Diseases, Uterus, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Premature Birth

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review