Does septum resection improve reproductive outcomes for women with a septate uterus? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Chang Liu, Zhiqi Liao, Xueqi Gong, Yinwei Chen
Author Information
  1. Chang Liu: Reproductive Medicine Center, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Nanjing, China.
  2. Zhiqi Liao: Reproductive Medicine Center, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
  3. Xueqi Gong: Reproductive Medicine Center, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
  4. Yinwei Chen: Reproductive Medicine Center, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.

Abstract

Objective: To investigate whether incising the septum facilitates reproductive outcomes for patients with a septate uterus compared to expectant management.
Methods: Research was retrieved from three electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, with no time or language restrictions. Two authors independently selected the articles and extracted data regarding study characteristics, quality, and results. A random-effects model was employed, and summary risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.
Results: A total of 468 patients from two randomized controlled trials and one cohort study were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Pooled results showed that septum resection did not improve the live birth rate for patients with a septate uterus (RR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.56 - 1.25, P = 0.39). Additionally, no significant differences were found between the septum resection and expectant management groups in terms of clinical pregnancy (RR = 1.08, 95% CI 0.81 - 1.44, P = 0.60), abortion (RR = 1.99, 95% CI 0.80 - 4.98, P = 0.14), and preterm delivery rates (RR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.42 - 2.31, P = 0.98).
Conclusion: Our data provide clear evidence that septum resection does not improve the reproductive outcomes of patients with a septate uterus. These findings might be useful for revising current clinical guidelines.

Keywords

References

  1. Semin Perinatol. 2019 Mar;43(2):74-79 [PMID: 30683511]
  2. Fertil Steril. 2006 May;85(5):1473-7 [PMID: 16600229]
  3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jan 17;1:CD008576 [PMID: 28093720]
  4. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2015;28(18):2141-4 [PMID: 25354290]
  5. Presse Med (1893). 1959 Feb 25;67(10):394-7 [PMID: 13633897]
  6. Fertil Steril. 2016 Sep 1;106(3):530-40 [PMID: 27235766]
  7. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2019 May;1(2):136-143 [PMID: 33345819]
  8. Hum Reprod. 2020 Jul 1;35(7):1578-1588 [PMID: 32353142]
  9. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 1995 Sep;22(3):473-89 [PMID: 8524532]
  10. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020 Sep - Oct;27(6):1287-1294 [PMID: 31812613]
  11. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Jan;172(1 Pt 1):105-7 [PMID: 7847514]
  12. Reprod Biomed Online. 2018 Dec;37(6):709-715 [PMID: 30527061]
  13. Fertil Steril. 2000 Jan;73(1):1-14 [PMID: 10632403]
  14. Fertil Steril. 2013 Jun;99(7):2092-6.e3 [PMID: 23433831]
  15. Obstet Gynecol. 1986 Sep;68(3):399-403 [PMID: 2942813]
  16. Fertil Steril. 2006 Feb;85(2):534-5; author reply 535-6 [PMID: 16595257]
  17. BJOG. 2021 Jul;128(8):1273-1281 [PMID: 33346920]
  18. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Oct;38(4):371-82 [PMID: 21830244]
  19. Fertil Steril. 1977 Aug;28(8):798-806 [PMID: 885269]
  20. Hum Reprod. 2021 Apr 20;36(5):1260-1267 [PMID: 33793794]
  21. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2015 Feb;35(2):155-8 [PMID: 25058627]
  22. Hum Reprod. 2020 Jul 1;35(7):1495-1498 [PMID: 32568394]
  23. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1970;49(4):327-30 [PMID: 5519616]
  24. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2012;73(4):321-5 [PMID: 22487709]

MeSH Term

Female
Humans
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Outcome
Pregnancy Rate
Septate Uterus

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.00=septumRR95%CIpatientsseptateresection-1Preproductiveoutcomesuterusimproveexpectantmanagementdatastudyresultssystematicreviewmeta-analysisclinicalpregnancy9998Objective:investigatewhetherincisingfacilitatescomparedMethods:Researchretrievedthreeelectronicdatabases:PubMedEmbaseCochraneLibrarytimelanguagerestrictionsTwoauthorsindependentlyselectedarticlesextractedregardingcharacteristicsqualityrandom-effectsmodelemployedsummaryriskratiosconfidenceintervalscalculatedResults:total468tworandomizedcontrolledtrialsonecohortincludedPooledshowedlivebirthrate84562539Additionallysignificantdifferencesfoundgroupsterms08814460abortion80414pretermdeliveryrates42231Conclusion:provideclearevidencefindingsmightusefulrevisingcurrentguidelineswomenuterus?assistedreproductiontechniqueembryotransferhysteroscopyuterinecavity

Similar Articles

Cited By