DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20213858

Fetomaternal outcome in pregnancies with reproductive tract anomalies

Asit K. Jena, Trinity L. Meetei, Salma Begum, Rameswar M. Singh, Lipsa Priyadarshinee, Nasima Begum, Taneesha Subba, Snehangshu Das

Abstract


Background: Congenital reproductive tract anomalies result from abnormal formation, fusion or resorption of the mullerian ducts during fetal life. Pregnancies with reproductive tract anomalies are known to have higher incidence of spontaneous abortions, fetal malpresentations, preterm labour, preterm premature rupture of membranes and increased cesarean section rate. The present study was conducted to describe the fetal and maternal outcomes among pregnant women with uncorrected reproductive tract anomalies in a tertiary care centre, Manipur, India.

Methods: A hospital based cross sectional study was conducted among pregnant women with uncorrected reproductive tract anomalies in regional institute of medical sciences, Imphal, Manipur, India between September 2018 to August 2020.

Results: A total of 62 pregnant women with uterine anomalies were included in the study. Bicornuate uterus was the most common uterine anomaly (45.2%) followed by arcuate uterus (19.3%). Cesarean section was conducted in 72.6% of the pregnant women and its major indication was fetal malpresentation (breech). Maternal complications were present in56.5% of the pregnancies and fetal complications in 27.4% of the newborns.

Conclusions: The current study has shown a significant association between uterine anomalies and maternal and fetal complications including premature rupture of membranes, fetal malpresentation and increased caesarean section rate. Further studies involving bigger sample size will help in understanding the problem more and hence in the prevention of the complications in future.


Keywords


Uterine anomalies, Malpresentation, Premature rupture of membranes

Full Text:

PDF

References


Amesse LS, Pfaff-Amesse T. Congenital anomalies of the reproductive tract. In: Falcone T, Hurd WW eds. Clinical reproductive medicine and surgery. 1st ed. New York: Mosby; 2007:171-90.

Moore KL, Persaud TVN, Torchia MG. The urogenital system. In: before we are born: essentials of embryology and birth defects. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier; 2008;162-89.

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.

Golan A, Langer R, Wexler S, Segev E, Niv D, David MP. Cervical cerclage-its role in the pregnant anomalous uterus. Int J Fertil. 1990;35(3):164-70.

Rama Ch, Esanakula J, Lepakshi G. Role of Congenital uterine anomalies in adverse pregnancy outcome. IOSR-JDMS. 2018;17(1):60-4.

Airoldi J, Berghella V, Sehdev H, Ludmir J. Transvaginal ultrasonography of the cervix to predict preterm birth in women with uterine anomalies. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106(3):553-6.

Acien P. Incidence of mullerian defects in fertile and infertile women. Human Reproduction. 1997;12(7): 1372-6.

Simon C, Martinez L, Pardo F, Tortajada M, Pellicer A. Müllerian defects in women with normal reproductive outcome. Fertil Steril. 1991;56(6):1192-3.

Buttram VC, Gibbons WE. Mullerian anomalies: A proposed classification (an analysis of 144 cases). Fertil Steril. 1979;32(2):40-8.

American Fertility Society. The american fertility society classification of adnexal adhesions, distal tubal occlusion, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, mullerian anomalies and intrauterine adhesions. Fertil Steril. 1988;49(6):944-55.

Rock JA, Schlaff D. The obstetric consequences of uterovaginal anomalies. Fertil Steril. 1985;43(5):681-92.

Airoldi J, Berghella V, Sehdev H, Ludmir J. Transvaginal ultrasonography of the cervix to predict preterm birth in women with uterine anomalies. Obstet Gynecol 2005;106(3):553-6.

Rackow BW, Arici A. Reproductive performance of women with mullerian anomalies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2007;19:229-37.

Salim R, Woelfer B, Backos M, Regan L, Jurkovic D. Reproducibility of three-dimensional ultrasound diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies. Ultrasound obstet Gynecol. 2003;21:578-82.

Ghi T, Casadio P, Kuleva M, Perrone AM, Savelli L, Giunchi S, et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound in diagnosis and classification of congenital uterine anomalies. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:808-13.

Sharma JB. Early pregnancy haemorrhage. In: Sharma JB, eds. Textbook of obstetrics. 2nd ed. New Delhi: Avichal publishing company; 2020:113-24.

Sharma JB. Preterm labor, fetal (intrauterine) growth restriction, intrauterine death and postmaturity. In: Sharma JB, eds. Textbook of obstetrics. 2nd ed. New Delhi: Avichal publishing company; 2020:480-505.

Vyas RC, Moghariya AM, Shah SR, Parikh PM, Shelat PM. Mullerian ductal anomalies and its outcome. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2019;8:440-4.

Chasen ST, Havryliuk Y, Troiano R. Uterine duplication anomalies and obstetric outcomes. AJOG. 2008;199(6):S102.

Butt F. Reproductive outcome in women with congenital uterine anomalies. Ann King Edw Med Univ. 2011;17(2):171.

Hua M, Odibo AO, Longman RE, Macones GA, Roehl KA, Cahill AG. Congenital uterine anomalies and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 205(6):558.

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.

Raga F, Bauset C, Remohi J, Bonilla-Musoles F, Simon C, Pellicer A. Reproductive impact of congenital mullerian anomalies. Hum Reprod. 1997; 12(10):2277-81.

Zhang Y, Zhao YY, Qiao J. Obstetric outcome of women with uterine anomalies in China. Chin Med J. 2010;123(4):418-22.

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(2):371-82.

Nagarathnamma R, James T, Prasad N. Pregnancy outcome in uterine anomalies. J Med Sci. 2017;3(1): 31-3.

Rama CH, Esanakula J, Lepakshi G. Role of congenital uterine anomalies in adverse pregnancy outcome. IOSR-JDMS. 2018;17(1):60-4.

Raj N, Chavan NN. An observational study of effect of mullerian anomalies on pregnancy. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2019;8:1155-61.