Mullerian anomalies: from diagnosis to intervention
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20242490Keywords:
Amenorrhea, Congenital mullerian anomalies, Infertility, MRI, Surgery, USGAbstract
Background: The aim of the study was to observe prevalence of Mullerian anomalies, their clinical features, various investigation modalities to diagnose anomalies, various treatment modalities to correct anomalies and outcome after correction.
Methods: A prospective study of congenital uterine anomalies and its outcome was performed by using data from women with congenital anomalies presented in OPD at tertiary care hospital. Total 25 women with various congenital anomalies included in this study. In these cases, diagnosis was made on clinical examinations and confirmed by diagnostic modalities like USG, MRI, laparoscopy and hysteroscopy. And then a plan of management was decided, and surgery was planned. And then follow up for 1 year.
Results: In this study, most common anomaly seen was septate uterus followed by Mullerian agenesis. Most common presenting symptom was infertility (primary and secondary) followed by primary amenorrhea.
Conclusions: Mullerian anomalies present themselves in diverse forms. Mullerian anomalies may be difficult to diagnose. For planning treatment and management strategies, establishing an accurate diagnosis is mandatory. The surgical approach for correction of utero vaginal anomalies is tailored to the type of malformation.
Metrics
References
Amesse LS. Mullerian duct anomalies. Medscape Aug 11, 2023. Available at: https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/273534-overview?form=fpf. Accessed 01 March 2024.
Strissel PL, Oppelt P, Cupisti S, Stiegler E, Beckman MW, Strike R. Assessment of pituitary and steroid hormones and member of the TGF-beta superfamily for ovarian function in patient with congenital uterus and vaginal aplasia (MRKH syndrome). Horm Res. 2009;41(5):408-13.
Passos IMPE, Britto RL. Diagnosis and treatment of müllerian malformations. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;59(2):183-8.
Akhtar MA, Saravelos SH, Li TC, Jayaprakasan K, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Reproductive implications and management of congenital uterine anomalies: scientific impact paper No. 62 November 2019. BJOG: Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;127(5):e1-3.
Te Linde's operative gynecology. Philadelphia, PA :Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Saravelos SH, Cocksedge KA, Li TC. Prevalence and diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies in women with reproductive failure: a critical appraisal. Human Reprod Upd. 2008;14(5):415-29.
Vanda VL, Le LV. Te Linde’s Operative gynecology. 12th ed. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2019.
Berek, Jonathan S. Berek and Novak’s gynecology. 16th ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (LWW);2019.
Hua M, Odibo AO, Longman RE, Macones GA, Roehl KA, Cahill AG. Congenital uterine anomalies and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Am J Obstetr Gynecol. 11;205(6):558-e1.
Tanmahasamut P, Rattanachaiyanont M, Dangrat C, Indhavivadhana S, Angsuwattana S, Techatraisak K. Causes of primary amenorrhea: a report of 295 cases in Thailand. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2012;38(1):297-301.
Raga F, Bauset C, Remohi J, Bonilla-Musoles F, Simón C, Pellicer A. Reproductive impact of congenital Müllerian anomalies. Human Reproduction (Oxford, England). 1997;12(10):2277-81.
Salim R, Regan L, Woelfer B, Backos M, Jurkovic D. A comparative study of the morphology of congenital uterine anomalies in women with and without a history of recurrent first trimester miscarriage. Human Reproduct. 2003;18(1):162-6.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
