The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Reproductive impact of congenital Mullerian anomalies
Open accessAbstract
This retrospective longitudinal study was undertaken in order to determine the incidence and reproductive impact of uterine malformations on women desiring to conceive during their reproductive years. A total of 3181 patients in whom the morphology of the uterus was ascertained by hysterosalpingography (HSG) and laparoscopy/laparotomy during the years 1980-1995 was included in the study. The population analysed included fertile, infertile and sterile patients. The overall frequency of uterine malformations was 4.0%. Infertile patients (6.3%) had a significantly (P < 0.05) higher incidence of Müllerian anomalies, in comparison with fertile (3.8%) and sterile (2.4%) women. Septate (33.6%) and arcuate (32.8%) uteri were the most common malformations observed. Each malformation was individually analysed in fertile and infertile patients, in order to ascertain its actual reproductive impact. The performance of the unicornuate and didelphys uteri was similar with a chance of having a living child of 37-40%. The reproductive potential of the bicornuate uterus showed a live birth rate of 62.5% and the septate uterus showed a live birth rate of 62%. In all these abnormalities, early miscarriages (25-38%) and preterm deliveries (25-47%) were quite common. The arcuate uterus presented a live birth rate of 82.7%. It is concluded that uterine anomalies are relatively frequent in fertile women, and more frequent in infertile patients. Nevertheless, fertile patients with normal reproductive performance do exist, and Müllerian defects can permit an absolutely normal obstetric outcome. The reproductive performance of the unicornuate and didelphys uteri was poor, while that of the septate and bicornuate uteri was better than expected. The arcuate uterus had no impact on reproduction.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Chan, Y. Y., Jayaprakasan, K., Zamora, J., Thornton, J. G., Raine-Fenning, N., & Coomarasamy, A. (2011) · Human Reproduction Update · doi:10.1093/humupd/dmr028 · Cited by 758
Saravelos, S. H., Cocksedge, K. A., & Li, T.-C. (2008) · Human Reproduction Update · doi:10.1093/humupd/dmn018 · Cited by 683
Reproductive outcomes in women with congenital uterine anomalies: a systematic review
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 · Cited by 564
McNamee, K. M., Dawood, F., & Farquharson, R. G. (2014) · Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.ogc.2013.10.007 · Cited by 125
Graupera, B., Pascual, M. A., Hereter, L., Browne, J. L., Úbeda, B., Rodríguez, I., & Pedrero, C. (2015) · Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1002/uog.14825 · Cited by 109
Metadata
- Authors
- Raga, F., Bauset, C., Remohi, J., Bonilla-Musoles, F., Simon, C., & Pellicer, A.
- Venue
- Human Reproduction
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1997-10-01
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2277-2281
- ISSN
- 0268-1161 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2350
- OpenAlex
- W2147800095
- Cited by
- 692
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reproductive impact of congenital Mullerian anomalies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/humrep/12.10.2277
- The paper
- Raga, F., Bauset, C., Remohi, J., Bonilla-Musoles, F., Simon, C., & Pellicer, A. (1997). Reproductive impact of congenital Mullerian anomalies. Human Reproduction. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/12.10.2277
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.