Limits...
Comparison of the ESHRE-ESGE and ASRM classifications of Müllerian duct anomalies in everyday practice.

Ludwin A, Ludwin I - Hum. Reprod. (2014)

Bottom Line: The percentages of all congenital malformations and results of the differentiation between the anomaly and norm were obtained after excluding the confounding original ESHRE-ESGE criterion of dysmorphic uterus (internal indentation <50% uterine wall thickness).K/ZDS/003821).The authors have no competing interests to declare.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Gynecology and Oncology, Jagiellonian University, ul. Kopernika 23, Krakow 31-501, Poland Ludwin & Ludwin Gynecology, Private Medical Center, Krakow 31-511, Poland ludwin@cm-uj.krakow.pl.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Common morphological forms of the uterus in 3D ultrasonography. Top row: (A) Interostial line at the height of the lowest point of the fundus of the cavity, (B) slightly below and (C) clearly below is not the most frequently encountered morphological form; therefore, it cannot be regarded as a primary exponent of the norm. Bottom row: (D–F) The presence of internal fundal indentation <50% of uterine wall thickness, which was much more frequent, is a confounding criterion for the diagnosis of dysmorphic uterus by the ESHRE–ESGE classification system.
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4325671&req=5

DEU344F3: Common morphological forms of the uterus in 3D ultrasonography. Top row: (A) Interostial line at the height of the lowest point of the fundus of the cavity, (B) slightly below and (C) clearly below is not the most frequently encountered morphological form; therefore, it cannot be regarded as a primary exponent of the norm. Bottom row: (D–F) The presence of internal fundal indentation <50% of uterine wall thickness, which was much more frequent, is a confounding criterion for the diagnosis of dysmorphic uterus by the ESHRE–ESGE classification system.

Mentions: The overall distinction between congenital uterine malformation and norm by both systems showed good agreement, if the confounding criterion for dysmorphic uterus (U1c by ESHRE–ESGE, Fig. 3) diagnosis was excluded (Tables III and V). Despite this modification, the ESHRE–ESGE classification more often classified the morphological state as a malformation than the ASRM classification (P < 0.1). According to the original ESHRE–ESGE classification, congenital uterine malformation was present in as many as 195 of 261 (74%) patients compared with 43 (16.5%) by ASRM. The RR of uterine anomaly diagnosis by ESHRE–ESGE versus ASRM would reach very high values (RR, 4.5, 95% CI, 3.4–6, P < 0.01). It is irrational and would undermine using the entire classification system to distinguish congenital malformation from the norm. Therefore, we did not apply this criterion as an exponent of anomaly (Fig. 3).Figure 3


Comparison of the ESHRE-ESGE and ASRM classifications of Müllerian duct anomalies in everyday practice.

Ludwin A, Ludwin I - Hum. Reprod. (2014)

Common morphological forms of the uterus in 3D ultrasonography. Top row: (A) Interostial line at the height of the lowest point of the fundus of the cavity, (B) slightly below and (C) clearly below is not the most frequently encountered morphological form; therefore, it cannot be regarded as a primary exponent of the norm. Bottom row: (D–F) The presence of internal fundal indentation <50% of uterine wall thickness, which was much more frequent, is a confounding criterion for the diagnosis of dysmorphic uterus by the ESHRE–ESGE classification system.
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4325671&req=5

DEU344F3: Common morphological forms of the uterus in 3D ultrasonography. Top row: (A) Interostial line at the height of the lowest point of the fundus of the cavity, (B) slightly below and (C) clearly below is not the most frequently encountered morphological form; therefore, it cannot be regarded as a primary exponent of the norm. Bottom row: (D–F) The presence of internal fundal indentation <50% of uterine wall thickness, which was much more frequent, is a confounding criterion for the diagnosis of dysmorphic uterus by the ESHRE–ESGE classification system.
Mentions: The overall distinction between congenital uterine malformation and norm by both systems showed good agreement, if the confounding criterion for dysmorphic uterus (U1c by ESHRE–ESGE, Fig. 3) diagnosis was excluded (Tables III and V). Despite this modification, the ESHRE–ESGE classification more often classified the morphological state as a malformation than the ASRM classification (P < 0.1). According to the original ESHRE–ESGE classification, congenital uterine malformation was present in as many as 195 of 261 (74%) patients compared with 43 (16.5%) by ASRM. The RR of uterine anomaly diagnosis by ESHRE–ESGE versus ASRM would reach very high values (RR, 4.5, 95% CI, 3.4–6, P < 0.01). It is irrational and would undermine using the entire classification system to distinguish congenital malformation from the norm. Therefore, we did not apply this criterion as an exponent of anomaly (Fig. 3).Figure 3

Bottom Line: The percentages of all congenital malformations and results of the differentiation between the anomaly and norm were obtained after excluding the confounding original ESHRE-ESGE criterion of dysmorphic uterus (internal indentation <50% uterine wall thickness).K/ZDS/003821).The authors have no competing interests to declare.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Gynecology and Oncology, Jagiellonian University, ul. Kopernika 23, Krakow 31-501, Poland Ludwin & Ludwin Gynecology, Private Medical Center, Krakow 31-511, Poland ludwin@cm-uj.krakow.pl.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus