Abstract
Objectives
To explore maternal and neonatal outcomes in pregnant women with bicornuate uteri.
Methods
Retrospective population-based cohort study utilizing data from the Healthcare-Cost and Utilization Project-Nationwide Inpatient Sample (HCUP-NIS) from 2010 to 2014. There were 3,846,342 births between 2010 and 2014, included in the study. Six thousand and 195 deliveries were to women with bicornuate uterus. The remaining deliveries without other uterine anomalies were categorized as the reference group (n=3,840,147).
Results
Pregnant women with bicornuate uterus were older and more likely to be obese (p=0.0001) with previous cesarean deliveries (CD) (31 vs. 17.1%, p=0.0001). After adjustment for confounders, they were more likely to experience pregnancy-induced hypertension (HTN) (aOR 1.21, 95%CI: 1.1–1.3), p=0.0001), preeclampsia (aOR 1.4, 95%CI: 1.2–1.6, p=0.0001) and placenta previa (aOR 1.7, 95%CI: 1.3–2.2, p=0.0001). Moreover, they were more likely to deliver preterm (aOR 2.8, 95%CI: 2.6–3.1, p=0.0001), deliver by CD (aOR 5, 95%CI: 3.1–4.1, p=0.0001), experience preterm pre-labor rupture of membranes (PPROM) (aOR 3.5, 95%CI: 2.6–3.1, p=0.0001), and have a placental abruption (aOR 3.0, 95%CI: 2.5–3.5, p=0.0001). There were increased risks of PPH (aOR 1.4, 95%CI: 1.2–1.6, p=0.0001), wound-complications (aOR 2.0, 95%CI: 1.5–2.7, p=0.0001), hysterectomy (aOR 2.6, 95%CI: 1.6–4.1, p=0.0001), blood-transfusion (aOR 1.7, 95%CI: 1.5–2.1, p=0.0001), and DIC (aOR 1.6, 95%CI: 1.1–2.5), p=0.014) in the group with bicornuate uteri. Also there was higher risk of SGA (aOR 2.9, 95%CI: 2.6–3.2, p=0.0001) and IUFD (aOR 2.5, 95%CI: 1.8–3.3, p=0.0001).
Conclusions
Bicornuate uteri can increase risks in pregnancy by many folds. Particularly risks of: premature delivery, CD, PPROM, placental abruption, hysterectomy, SGA and IUFD were increased 250–500%.
-
Research funding: None declared.
-
Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
-
Competing interests: Authors state no conflict of interest.
-
Informed consent: Not applicable.
-
Ethical approval: Not applicable.
References
1. Moore, KL, Persaud, TVN, Torchia, MG. The urogenital system. In: Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects, 7th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders/Elsevier; 2008. pp. 162–89.Search in Google Scholar
2. Byrne, J, Nussbaum-Blask, A, Taylor, WS, Rubin, A, Hill, M, O’Donnell, R, et al.. Prevalence of Müllerian duct anomalies detected at ultrasound. Am J Med Genet 2000;94:9–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/1096-8628(20000904)94:1<9::aid-ajmg3>3.0.co;2-h.10.1002/1096-8628(20000904)94:1<9::AID-AJMG3>3.0.CO;2-HSearch in Google Scholar
3. Maneschi, F, Zupi, E, Marconi, D, Valli, E, Romanini, C, Mancuso, S. Hysteroscopically detected asymptomatic müllerian anomalies. Prevalence and reproductive implications. J Reprod Med 1995;40:684–8.Search in Google Scholar
4. Simón, C, Martinez, L, Pardo, F, Tortajada, M, Pellicer, A. Müllerian defects in women with normal reproductive outcome. Fertil Steril 1991;56:1192–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(16)54741-4.Search in Google Scholar
5. Stampe Sørensen, S. Estimated prevalence of müllerian anomalies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1988;67:441–5.10.3109/00016348809004257Search in Google Scholar
6. Raga, F, Bauset, C, Remohi, J, Bonilla-Musoles, F, Simón, C, Pellicer, A. Reproductive impact of congenital Müllerian anomalies. Hum Reprod 1997;12:2277–81. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/12.10.2277.Search in Google Scholar
7. Sadek, SM, Ahmad, RA. Soliman BS. Three dimensional color Doppler transvaginal ultrasound morphologic features of uterine septum and residual cavity in women with reproductive failure. Middle East Fertility Soc J 2015;20:21–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mefs.2014.03.006.Search in Google Scholar
8. Rock, JA, Schlaf, WD. The obstetric consequences of uterovaginal anomalies. Fertil Steril 1985;43:681–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(16)48548-1.Search in Google Scholar
9. Stray-Pedersen, B, Stray-Pedersen, S. Etiologic factors and subsequent reproductive performance in 195 couples with a prior history of habitual abortion. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984;148:140–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9378(84)80164-7.Search in Google Scholar
10. Sanflippo, JS, Wakim, NG, Schikler, KN, Yussman, MA. Endometriosis in association with uterine anomaly. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986;154:39–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(86)90389-3.Search in Google Scholar
11. Green, LK, Harrisanomalies, REU. Frequency of diagnosis and associated obstetric complications. Obstet Gynecol 1976;47:427–9.Search in Google Scholar
12. Acién, P. Reproductive performance of women with uterine malformations. Hum Reprod 1993;8:122–6.10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137860Search in Google Scholar
13. Acién, P. Incidence of Müllerian defects in fertile and infertile women. Hum Reprod 1997;12:1372–6.10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019588Search in Google Scholar
14. Strassmann, EO. Fertility and unifcation of double uterus. Fertil Steril 1966; 17:165–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(16)35882-4.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
15. Lin, PC, Bhatnagar, KP, Nettleton, GS, Nakajima, ST. Female genital anomalies afecting reproduction. Fertil Steril 2002;78:899–915. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(02)03368-x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
16. Tulandi, T, Arronet, GH, McInnes, RA. Arcuate and bicornuate uterine anomalies and infertility. Fertil Steril 1980;34:362–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(16)45023-5.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
17. Rackow, BW, Arici, A. Reproductive performance of women with Mullerian anomalies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2007;19:229–37. https://doi.org/10.1097/gco.0b013e32814b0649.Search in Google Scholar
18. Tomazevic, T, Ban-Frangez, H, Ribic-Pucelj, M, Premru-Srsen, T, Verdenik, I. Small uterine septum is an important risk variable for preterm birth. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2007;135:154–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2006.12.001.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
19. Stein, AL, March, CM. Pregnancy outcome in women with Mullerian duct anomalies. J Reprod Med 1990;35:411–4.Search in Google Scholar
20. Grimbizis, GF, Camus, M, Tarlatzis, BC, Bontis, JN, Devroey, P. Clinical implications of uterine malformations and hysteroscopic treatment results. Hum Reprod Update 2001;7:161–74. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/7.2.161.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
21. Lin, PC. Reproductive outcomes in women with uterine anomalies. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2004;13:33–9. https://doi.org/10.1089/154099904322836438.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
22. 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;38:371–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.10056.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
23. Faivre, E, Fernandez, H, Deffieux, X, Gervaise, A, Frydman, R, Levaillant, JM. Accuracy of three-dimensional Ultrasonography in differential diagnosis of septate and bicornuate uterus compared with office hysteroscopy and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2012;19:101–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2011.08.724.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
24. Ludwin, A, Ludwin, I, Banas, T, Anna, K, Miedzyblocki, M, Basta, A. Diagnostic accuracy of sonohysterography, hysterosalpingography and diagnostic hysteroscopy in diagnosis of arcuate, septate and bicornuate uterus. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2011;37:178–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1447-0756.2010.01304.x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
25. Andrea Mastrolia, S, Baumfeld, Y, Hershkovitz, R, Yohay, D, Trojano, G, Weintraub, AY. Independent association between uterine malformations and cervical insufficiency: a retrospective population-based cohort study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2018;297:919–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-018-4663-2.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
26. Andrea Mastrolia, S, Baumfeld, Y, Hershkovitz, R, Loverro, G, Di Naro, E, Yohai, D, et al.. Bicornuate uterus is an independent risk factor for cervical os insufficiency: a retrospective population based cohort study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2017;30:2705–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2016.1261396.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
27. Venetis, CA, Papadopoulos, SP, Campo, R, Gordts, S, Tarlatzis, BC, Grimbizis, GF. Clinical implications of congenital uterine anomalies: a meta-analysis of comparative studies. Reprod Biomed Online 2014;29:665–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.09.006.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
28. Reichman, DE, Laufer, MR. Congenital uterine anomalies affecting reproduction. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2010;24:193–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2009.09.006.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
29. Leible, S, Muñoz, 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;178:1048–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9378(98)70546-0.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
30. Zhang, C, Wang, X, Jiang, H, Hou, L, Zou, L. Placenta percreta after Strassman metroplasty of complete bicornuate uterus: a case report. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2021;21:95. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-03540-y.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
31. Oliva, GC, Fratoni, A, Genova, M, Romanini, C. Uterine motility in patients with bicornuate uterus. Int J Gynecol Obstet, 1992;37: 7–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7292(92)90971-k.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston