Class
Subclass
Main characteristics
Image
Class U0 = normal uterus
Straight curved line but with an internal indentation at the fundal midline not exceeding 50 % of the uterine wall thickness
Uterine deformity defined by the proportion of the uterine anomaly landmarks
Class U1 = dysmorphic uterus
Normal uterine outline but with an abnormal shape of the uterine cavity excluding septa
Class U1a/T-shaped uterus
Narrow uterine cavity due to thickened lateral walls with a correlation 2/3 uterine corpus and 1/3 cervix
Class U1b/uterus infantilis
Narrow uterine cavity without lateral wall thickening and an inverse correlation of 1/3 uterine body and 2/3 cervix
Class U1c or others
All minor deformities of the uterine cavity including those with an inner indentation at the fundal midline level of <50 % of the uterine wall thickness
Class U2 = septate uterus
Normal fusion and abnormal absorption of the midline septum
Class U2a/partial septate uterus
Existence of a septum dividing partly the uterine cavity above the level of the internal cervical os
Class U2b/complete septate uterus
Existence of a septum fully dividing the uterine cavity up to the level of the internal cervical os. These patients could have or not cervical (e.g., bicervical septate uterus) and/or vaginal defects
Class U3 = bicorporeal uterus
All cases of fusion defects—an abnormal fundal outline
Characterized by the presence of an external indentation at the fundal midline exceeding 50 % of the uterine wall thickness. This indentation could divide partly or completely the uterine corpus including in some cases the cervix and/or vagina. It is also associated with an inner indentation at the midline level that divides the cavity as happens also in the case of septate uterus
Class U3a/partial bicorporeal uterus
External fundal indentation partly dividing the uterine corpus above the level of the cervix
Class U3b/complete bicorporeal uterus
External fundal indentation completely dividing the uterine corpus up to the level of the cervix
Class U3c/bicorporeal septate uterus
Presence of an absorption defect in addition to the main fusion defect. The width of the midline fundal indentation exceeds by 150 % the uterine wall thickness. Could have or not co-existent cervical (e.g., double cervix/formerly didelphys uterus) and/or vaginal defects (e.g., obstructing or not vaginal septum)
Class U4 = hemi-uterus
All cases of unilateral formed uterus, defined as the unilateral uterine development; the contralateral part could be either incompletely formed or absent. It is a formation defect
Class U4a/hemi-uterus with a rudimentary (functional) cavity
The presence of a communicating or non-communicating functional contralateral horn
Class U4b/hemi-uterus without rudimentary (functional) cavity
Characterized either by the presence of non-functional contralateral uterine horn or by aplasia of the contralateral part. The presence of a functional cavity in the contralateral part is the only clinically important factor for complications, such as hemato-cavity or ectopic pregnancy in the rudimentary horn or hemato-cavity
Class U5 = aplastic uterus
All cases of uterine aplasia. Absence of any fully or unilaterally developed uterine cavity. In some cases there could be bi- or unilateral rudimentary horns with cavity, while in others there could be uterine remnants without cavity
Class U5a/aplastic uterus with rudimentary cavity
Presence of bi- or unilateral functional horn
Class U5b/aplastic uterus without rudimentary (functional) cavity
Presence of uterine remnants or by full uterine aplasia. The presence of a horn with cavity is clinically important and it is used as a criterion for subclassification because it is combined with health problems (cyclic pain and/or hemato-cavity) necessitating treatment
Class U6
Incorporates unclassified cases. Cases of infrequent anomalies, subtle changes, or combined pathologies that could not be allocated correctly to one of the six groups
1.
The basis for the categorization of the anomalies is the anatomy.
2.
The main classes are based on the type of uterine anomalies derived from the same embryological origin.
3.
Subclasses are defined as anatomical variations of the main classes expressing different degrees of uterine deformity.
4.
Cervical and vaginal anomalies are classified separately, from the less severe variants to the most severe in the order they appear in the classification system. In a recent study, Di Spiezio Sardo concluded that the comprehensiveness of the ESHRE/ESGE classification adds objective scientific validity [21]. This may, therefore, promote its further dissemination and acceptance, with a probable positive outcome in clinical care and research.
Uterine Anomalies Diagnostic Modalities and Techniques
Several diagnostic modalities including both invasive and noninvasive techniques are available for the diagnosis of anatomical anomalies of the uterus. In RPL patients, imaging studies play an important role during the initial work-up.
3D Ultrasonography
A noninvasive method , currently available in most clinics and considered to be the preferred diagnostic modality. It is a relatively quick imaging method that allows the evaluation of the external contours of the uterus (Fig. 7.1) with MRI comparable results. Examples of TVS findings in various congenital uterine anomalies are presented in Figs. 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, and 7.5. The ability of 3D ultrasonography to visualize both the uterine cavity and the myometrium, as well its ability to differentiate subseptate from bicornuate uteri, makes it an accurate modality for the detection of uterine anomalies [22]. Szkodziak et al. [23] compared the performance of hysterosalpingography (HSG) and 3D transvaginal sonography (TVS) in diagnosing uterine anomalies. In 22 cases out of 155 the diagnosis of arcuate, septate, and bicornuate uterus was possible only after the use of 3D TVS. Importantly, in five patients the HSG exam could not be completed due to severe pain and lack of cooperation; a 3D TVS was performed and found all five cases to have normal uterus. The authors concluded that 3D TVS can accurately demonstrate uterine anomalies. Salim et al. [24] examined the reproducibility of the diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies and the repeatability of the measurements of uterine cavity dimensions using 3D TVS. Two independent observers evaluated the data. Eighty-three 3D TVS volumes were examined and both investigators diagnosed 27 uteri as normal, 33 as arcuate, 19 as subseptate, and 3 as unicornuate; only a single uterine anomaly was classified by one as arcuate and by the other as subseptate (kappa 0.97). They concluded that 3D TVS is a reproducible method in diagnosing congenital uterine anomalies (Fig. 7.1).
Fig. 7.1
Multiplanar imaging of a normal uterus at volume ultrasound: the volume rendering box is as narrow as possible in the sagittal plane (panel b) and adjusted on the uterine corpus in the coronal plane (panel a). A rendered image of the normal uterus on the coronal plane is displayed in panel d. [Reprinted from Ghi, Tullio et al., Accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound in diagnosis and classification of congenital uterine anomalies. Fertil Steril. 2009;92(2):808–13. With permission from Elsevier]
Fig. 7.2
Examples of three-dimensional transvaginal sonography findings in congenital anomalies of the uterus. (a) Arcuate uterus, (b) Bicornuate uterus, (c) Septate uterus, (d) Subseptate uterus, (e) Pregnancy in septate uterus. (a–d) [Reprinted from Ghi, Tullio et al., Accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound in diagnosis and classification of congenital uterine anomalies. Fertil Steril. 2009;92(2):808–13. With permission from Elsevier]. (e) [Courtesy of Tullio Ghi, MD, PhD]
Fig. 7.3
Three-dimensional surface-rendered ultrasound images showing different types of uterine malformation using the American Fertility Society classification: (a) normal uterus; (b) unicornuate uterus; (c) didelphic uterus; (d) complete bicornuate uterus; (e) partial bicornuate uterus; (f) septate uterus with two cervices; (g) partial septate/subseptate uterus; (h) arcuate uterus; (i) uterus with DES drug-related malformations. [Reprinted from Bermejo, C., Martinez Ten, P., Cantarero, R., Diaz, D., Perez Pedregosa, J., Barron, E. Ruiz Lopez, L. Three-dimensional ultrasound in the diagnosis of Mullerian duct anomalies and concordance with magnetic resonance imaging. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2010;35(5), 593–601. With permission from John Wiley & Sons, Inc.]
Fig. 7.4
To distinguish bicornuate uteri from septate uteri with three-dimensional ultrasound we used the formula proposed by Troiano and McCarthy: a line was traced joining both horns of the uterine cavity. If this line crossed the fundus or was ≤5 mm from it, the uterus was considered bicornuate (a and b); if it was >5 mm from the fundus it was considered septate, regardless of whether the fundus was dome-shaped (c), smooth or discretely notched. [Reprinted from Bermejo, C., Martinez Ten, P., Cantarero, R., Diaz, D., Perez Pedregosa, J., Barron, E. Ruiz Lopez, L. Three-dimensional ultrasound in the diagnosis of Mullerian duct anomalies and concordance with magnetic resonance imaging. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2010;35(5), 593–601. With permission from John Wiley & Sons, Inc.]
Fig. 7.5
Comparison of three-dimensional ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in cases of uterine malformation; the two imaging modalities are extremely similar. Images, according to the American Fertility Society classification, show: (a) unicornuate uterus (Type IId); (b) bicornuate bicollis uterus (Type IVb); (c) septate uterus with two cervices (Type Va); (d) partial septate uterus (Type Vb); (e) uterus with diethylstilbestrol (DES) drug-related malformations (Type VII). [Reprinted from Bermejo, C., Martinez Ten, P., Cantarero, R., Diaz, D., Perez Pedregosa, J., Barron, E. Ruiz Lopez, L. Three-dimensional ultrasound in the diagnosis of Mullerian duct anomalies and concordance with magnetic resonance imaging. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2010;35(5), 593–601. With permission from John Wiley & Sons, Inc.]
Ghi et al. [25] studied the accuracy of 3D ultrasound in the diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies among a group of women with RPL.
Ultrasound scan was performed using a machine equipped with a multi-frequency volume endovaginal probe. The insonation technique was standardized according to the following criteria: probe frequency set at 9 mHz, a midsagittal view of the uterus filling 75 % of the screen, three-dimensional (3D) box size including the uterus from fundus to the cervix, sweep angle of 90°, and sweep velocity adjusted to maximum quality. As shown in Fig. 7.1, the volume reconstruction technique was standardized according to the following criteria: the volume rendering box was as narrow as possible in the sagittal plane and adjusted on the uterine corpus in the coronal plane, cut plane scrolled in anterior-posterior fashion with slice thickness set at 1 cm, transparency low (<50 %), and volume rendering by a mix of surface and maximum mode. The analysis of uterine morphology was performed in a standardized reformatted section with the uterus in the coronal view using the interstitial portions of fallopian tubes as reference points. Specific ultrasound diagnosis of uterine anomalies was based on the classification system originally proposed by the American Fertility Society and subsequently modified according to 3D ultrasound landmarks [10] (Table 7.2).
Table 7.2
Classification of congenital uterine anomalies according to volume transvaginal ultrasound
Uterine morphology | Fundal contour | External contour |
---|---|---|
Normal | Straight or convex | Uniformly convex or with indentation <10 mm |
Arcuate | Concave fundal indentation with central point of indentation at obtuse angle | Uniformly convex or with indentation <10 mm |
Subseptate | Presence of septum, which does not extend to cervix, with central point of septum at an acute angle | Uniformly convex or with indentation <10 mm |
Septate | Presence of uterine septum that completely divides cavity from fundus to cervix | Uniformly convex or with indentation <10 mm |
Bicornuate | Two well-formed uterine cornua | Fundal indentation >10 mm dividing the two cornua |
Unicornuate with or without rudimentary horn | Single well-formed uterine cavity with a single interstitial portion of Fallopian tube and concave fundal contour | – |
Women with negative ultrasound findings subsequently underwent office hysteroscopy; a combined laparoscopic-hysteroscopic assessment was performed in cases of suspected Müllerian anomaly. A specific Müllerian malformation was sonographically diagnosed in 54 of the 284 women (19 %) included in the study group. All negative ultrasound findings were confirmed at office hysteroscopy. Among the women with abnormal ultrasound findings, the presence of a Müllerian anomaly was endoscopically confirmed in all. Concordance between ultrasound and endoscopy around the type of anomaly was verified in 52 of the 54 (96.3 %) cases, including all cases with a septate uterus and two out of three with bicornuate uterus. This important study concluded that volume TVS appears to be extremely accurate for the diagnosis and classification of congenital uterine anomalies and should conveniently become the first recommended step in the assessment of the uterine cavity in patients with a history of recurrent miscarriage. Three-dimensional ultrasound enables the clinician to comprehensively assess uterine morphology, thus alleviating the need for invasive tests.
Hysterosalpingography (HSG) is a radiographic procedure performed in order to mainly examine the patency of the Fallopian tubes and the morphology of the uterine cavity. It is usually indicated in the early stages of an infertility work-up [26]. The radio-opaque contrast medium fills the cavity, allowing the accurate identification of filling defects due to Müllerian malformations. However, this technique cannot accurately differentiate a septate uterus from a bicornuate uterus [22]. It is also unable to determine the myometrial thickness above the defect or the size of the defect itself. Therefore, the major limitation of this exam lies in its inability to evaluate the external uterine contour [5]. Another disadvantage is the exposure to ionizing radiation in typically young women.
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)
An expensive, powerful but noninvasive and accurate technique. It has displayed promising results in the diagnosis and categorization of uterine malformations with an accuracy of up to 100 % in the evaluation of Müllerian anomalies [5]. In a study by Bermejo et al. [27], a high degree of concordance between 3D TVS and MRI was reported for the diagnosis of uterine malformations. The structural relationship between the uterine cavity and fundus was equally well visualized with both techniques. Currently MRI is indicated as a complementary imaging modality to 3D ultrasound only in cases of complex abnormalities that involve in addition to the uterus both the cervix and the vagina [22].
Diagnostic Hysteroscopy
Hysteroscopy has become the gold standard for the evaluation of the uterine cavity and is a reliable and safe method in an office setting [22]. This technique allows visualization of the inner part of the cervix and uterus, offering direct vision of the uterine cavity and its internal structures and allows guided biopsies to be obtained if necessary [28]. However, it is also an invasive method that may cause patient discomfort. Hysteroscopy alone is unable to differentiate a septate uterus from a bicornuate uterus [22]. In a retrospective analysis performed by Valli et al. [29], 344 women with RPL and 922 controls were referred for diagnostic hysteroscopy. There was a significantly higher rate of major and minor uterine anomalies (septate and unicornuate uterus) in the RPL group compared to the control group (32 % vs. 6 %, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in uterine adhesions between the two groups. Another retrospective analysis by Weiss et al. [30] compared the prevalence of uterine anomalies between women referred to hysteroscopy for RPL after two or more consecutive miscarriages. There was no significant difference in uterine abnormality rates between the 67 patients with 2 RPLs and the 98 patients with 3 or more RPLs (32 % vs. 28 %, respectively).
Diagnostic Laparoscopy
This modality gives the surgeon the ability to assess the outer surface of the uterus as well as other pelvic structures. Nonetheless, it is more expensive and invasive [5] compared to the previously reviewed modalities. Currently, diagnostic laparoscopy is generally reserved for women in whom interventional therapy is likely to be undertaken and rarely used for uterine anatomic evaluation purposes [22]. As shown by some, the high accuracy of 3D TVS or MRI allows a noninvasive diagnosis and characterization of uterine anomalies without the need for diagnostic laparoscopy [28].
Sonohysterography
A transvaginal sonogram used in combination with a saline contrast medium injected into the uterine cavity. This is a simple and quick procedure with minimal discomfort to the patient and is now being increasingly used for a routine evaluation of the uterine cavity [22]. Goldberg et al. [26] performed transvaginal sonohysterography on 40 consecutive patients with infertility or RPL previously diagnosed with uterine abnormalities by HSG. The study found that sonohysterography was more accurate than HSG and provided more information about uterine abnormalities. It also provides additional information on the relative proportion of the intracavitary and intramyometrial components of submucous myomas, as well as extracavitary myomas and adhesions [26].
RPL in Different Types of Müllerian Duct Anomalies and Treatment Options
Uterine anomalies have been associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes including spontaneous abortion, recurrent miscarriage, malpresentation, placental abruption, IUGR, prematurity, operative delivery, retained placenta, and fetal mortality [2, 31]. However, it is difficult to assess reproductive outcome precisely, because the majority of studies do not have a control group. In the following section we discuss the treatment of the uterine malformations among women with RPL.
Septated Uterus (ESHRE Classification Class U2)
Septated uterus is the most common Müllerian anomaly, accounting for about 55 % of all Müllerian duct anomalies [5]. It is also the most common major uterine anomaly in women with RPL [32], with a reported prevalence of 15–26 %.
The etiology of RPL in a septated uterus was originally attributed to the fibrous and vascular nature of the septum, despite the lack of histologic data [33, 34]. However, thanks to the use of MRI and histology it is now clear that the septum is composed primarily of smooth muscle and not fibrous tissue [5].
The increased risk of pregnancy loss is most probably related to the decreased connective tissue of the septum that may result in poor decidualization and reduced implantation rate, while increased muscular tissue may result in increased contractility of the tissue. In addition to the inherent deficiencies of the composition of the septum, the overlying endometrium has been shown to be defective [35]. Studies employing electron microscopy reported that the septal endometrium was found to be irregular in morphology, with a decreased sensitivity to preovulatory hormonal changes [36]. Morphologic narrowing of the cavity by the septum, causing a reduction in endometrial capacity, is also believed to play a role in the pathophysiology of adverse reproductive outcome [37].
Finally, inadequate vascularization within the septum and altered relationships between the endometrial, myometrial vessels and myometrial nerves are also considered to be associated with RPL [33, 34]. If this is true, the likelihood of miscarriage caused by septal implantation should increase with the severity of the disruption of uterine morphology [24].
Adverse pregnancy outcome seems to be increased in women with septate uterus as shown in several studies with fetal survival between 6 and 28 % [2]. Ghi et al. [38] reported on pregnancy outcome in women with incidental diagnosis of septate uterus at first trimester scan. They found that in 24 patients diagnosed at a median gestational age of 8.2 weeks, the cumulative pregnancy progression rate was 33.35 % due to the occurrence of early (≤13 weeks) or late (14–22 weeks) miscarriages in 13 and 2 cases, respectively.