Fertility and sterility · 1993
Pregnancy after metroplasty for uterine anomalies.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kirk E P, Chuong C J, Coulam C B, Williams T J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To clarify the relation between metroplasty for correction of uterine anomalies and subsequent pregnancy, we reviewed the charts of all patients for whom a diagnosis of bicornuate, septate, or didelphic uterus had been made between 1972 and 1982 and analyzed their obstetric outcomes.
DESIGN: Of the 146 patients evaluated, 23 received a metroplasty procedure, and 123 patients did not have surgical intervention. Fifteen of the nonsurgical patients could be matched with 15 of the surgical patients by age, chief complaint, gravidity, and type of anomaly and therefore served as matched controls.
RESULTS: The percentage of patients with living children after the diagnosis of uterine anomaly was 67% for the matched nonsurgical group and 73% for the patients who underwent metroplasty. The difference was not statistically significant. Although marked improvement in fetal salvage rates was noted when reproductive outcomes before and after metroplasty were compared, the obstetric outcome was similar to that of the control groups after the diagnosis was made and surgery deferred.
CONCLUSION: The efficacy of metroplasty in the treatment of multiple pregnancy losses is thus being questioned.
DESIGN: Of the 146 patients evaluated, 23 received a metroplasty procedure, and 123 patients did not have surgical intervention. Fifteen of the nonsurgical patients could be matched with 15 of the surgical patients by age, chief complaint, gravidity, and type of anomaly and therefore served as matched controls.
RESULTS: The percentage of patients with living children after the diagnosis of uterine anomaly was 67% for the matched nonsurgical group and 73% for the patients who underwent metroplasty. The difference was not statistically significant. Although marked improvement in fetal salvage rates was noted when reproductive outcomes before and after metroplasty were compared, the obstetric outcome was similar to that of the control groups after the diagnosis was made and surgery deferred.
CONCLUSION: The efficacy of metroplasty in the treatment of multiple pregnancy losses is thus being questioned.