Marco Gergolet

Postoperative adhesions represent a frequent complication of abdominal surgery. Adhesions can result from infection, ischemia, and foreign body reaction, but commonly develop after any surgical procedure. The morbidity caused by adhesions affects quality of life and, therefore, it is paramount to continue to raise awareness and scientific recognition of the burden of adhesions in healthcare and clinical research. This 2021 Global Expert Consensus Group worked together to produce consented statements to guide future clinical research trials and advise regulatory authorities. It is critical to harmonize the expectations of research, to both develop and bring to market improved anti-adhesion therapies, with the ultimate, shared goal of improved patient outcomes.

What is the recommended diagnostic work-up of female genital anomalies according to the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE)/European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) system? The ESHRE/ESGE consensus for the diagnosis of female genital anomalies is presented. Accurate diagnosis of congenital anomalies still remains a clinical challenge due to the drawbacks of the previous classification systems and the non-systematic use of diagnostic methods with varying accuracy, with some of them quite inaccurate. Currently, a wide range of non-invasive diagnostic procedures are available, enriching the opportunity to accurately detect the anatomical status of the female genital tract, as well as a new objective and comprehensive classification system with well-described classes and sub-classes. The ESHRE/ESGE Congenital Uterine Anomalies (CONUTA) Working Group established an initiative with the goal of developing a consensus for the diagnosis of female genital anomalies. The CONUTA working group and imaging experts in the field have been appointed to run the project. The consensus is developed based on (1) evaluation of the currently available diagnostic methods and, more specifically, of their characteristics with the use of the experts panel consensus method and of their diagnostic accuracy performing a systematic review of evidence and (2) consensus for (a) the definition of where and how to measure uterine wall thickness and (b) the recommendations for the diagnostic work-up of female genital anomalies, based on the results of the previous evaluation procedure, with the use of the experts panel consensus method. Uterine wall thickness is defined as the distance between interostial line and external uterine profile at the midcoronal plane of the uterus; alternatively, if a coronal plane is not available, the mean anterior and posterior uterine wall thickness at the longitudinal plane could be used. Gynaecological examination and two-dimensional ultrasound (2D US) are recommended for the evaluation of asymptomatic women. Three-dimensional ultrasound (3D US) is recommended for the diagnosis of female genital anomalies in “symptomatic” patients belonging to high-risk groups for the presence of a female genital anomaly and in any asymptomatic woman suspected to have an anomaly from routine avaluation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endoscopic evaluation are recommended for the sub-group of patients with suspected complex anomalies or in diagnostic dilemmas. Adolescents with symptoms suggestive for the presence of a female genital anomaly should be thoroughly evaluated with 2D US, 3D US, MRI and endoscopy. The various diagnostic methods should be used in a proper way and evaluated by experts to avoid mis-, over- and underdiagnosis. The role of a combined ultrasound examination and outpatient hysteroscopy should be prospectively evaluated. It is a challenge for further research, based on diagnosis, to objectively evaluate the clinical consequences related to various degrees of uterine deformity.

What is the recommended diagnostic work-up of female genital anomalies according to the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE)/European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) system? The ESHRE/ESGE consensus for the diagnosis of female genital anomalies is presented. Accurate diagnosis of congenital anomalies still remains a clinical challenge because of the drawbacks of the previous classification systems and the non-systematic use of diagnostic methods with varying accuracy, some of them quite inaccurate. Currently, a wide range of non-invasive diagnostic procedures are available enriching the opportunity to accurately detect the anatomical status of the female genital tract, as well as a new objective and comprehensive classification system with well-described classes and sub-classes. The ESHRE/ESGE CONgenital UTerine Anomalies (CONUTA) Working Group established an initiative with the goal of developing a consensus for the diagnosis of female genital anomalies. The CONUTA working group and imaging experts in the field have been appointed to run the project. The consensus is developed based on: (i) evaluation of the currently available diagnostic methods and, more specifically, of their characteristics with the use of the experts panel consensus method and of their diagnostic accuracy by performing a systematic review of evidence and (ii) consensus for the definition of where and how to measure uterine wall thickness and the recommendations for the diagnostic work-up of female genital anomalies, based on the results of the previous evaluation procedure, with the use of the experts panel consensus method. Uterine wall thickness is defined as the distance between the interostial line and external uterine profile at the midcoronal plane of the uterus; alternatively, if a coronal plane is not available, the mean anterior and posterior uterine wall thickness at the longitudinal plane could be used. Gynecological examination and two-dimensional ultrasound (2D US) are recommended for the evaluation of asymptomatic women. Three-dimensional (3D) US is recommended for the diagnosis of female genital anomalies in ‘symptomatic’ patients belonging to high risk groups for the presence of a female genital anomaly and in any asymptomatic woman suspected to have an anomaly from routine evaluation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endoscopic evaluation are recommended for the subgroup of patients with suspected complex anomalies or in diagnostic dilemmas. Adolescents with symptoms suggestive for the presence of a female genital anomaly should be thoroughly evaluated with 2D US, 3D US, MRI and endoscopically. The various diagnostic methods should always be used in the proper way and evaluated by experts to avoid mis-, over- and underdiagnosis. The role of a combined US examination and outpatient hysteroscopy should be prospectively evaluated. It is a challenge for further research, based on diagnosis, to objectively evaluate the clinical consequences related to various degrees of uterine deformity. None.

The aim of the study was to evaluate whether hysteroscopic metroplasty for septate uterus represents a risk factor of adverse outcome in pregnancy, during labor, and after delivery. This is a retrospective comparative study of obstetric complications of 99 patients who underwent hysteroscopic metroplasty in a 5-year period (study group) and 4155 women, who gave birth in the same hospital in the same period (control group). No difference in obstetric outcome (preterm labor, hemorrhage before and after delivery, mean weeks of gestation at delivery, mean birth weight, breech presentation, and cesarean section rate) between the two groups has been found. The results of this study suggest that patients who underwent hysteroscopic metroplasty for septate uterus are at no higher risk of adverse obstetric outcome at term and during labor, comparing to the general population. Though vaginal delivery seems to be safe, rare but serious complication, reported by several studies, like uterine rupture during pregnancy or labor, should always be taken into consideration.

How comprehensive is the recently published European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE)/European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) classification system of female genital anomalies? The ESHRE/ESGE classification provides a comprehensive description and categorization of almost all of the currently known anomalies that could not be classified properly with the American Fertility Society (AFS) system. Until now, the more accepted classification system, namely that of the AFS, is associated with serious limitations in effective categorization of female genital anomalies. Many cases published in the literature could not be properly classified using the AFS system, yet a clear and accurate classification is a prerequisite for treatment. The CONUTA (CONgenital UTerine Anomalies) ESHRE/ESGE group conducted a systematic review of the literature to examine if those types of anomalies that could not be properly classified with the AFS system could be effectively classified with the use of the new ESHRE/ESGE system. An electronic literature search through Medline, Embase and Cochrane library was carried out from January 1988 to January 2014. Three participants independently screened, selected articles of potential interest and finally extracted data from all the included studies. Any disagreement was discussed and resolved after consultation with a fourth reviewer and the results were assessed independently and approved by all members of the CONUTA group. Among the 143 articles assessed in detail, 120 were finally selected reporting 140 cases that could not properly fit into a specific class of the AFS system. Those 140 cases were clustered in 39 different types of anomalies. The congenital anomaly involved a single organ in 12 (30.8%) out of the 39 types of anomalies, while multiple organs and/or segments of Müllerian ducts (complex anomaly) were involved in 27 (69.2%) types. Uterus was the organ most frequently involved (30/39: 76.9%), followed by cervix (26/39: 66.7%) and vagina (23/39: 59%). In all 39 types, the ESHRE/ESGE classification system provided a comprehensive description of each single or complex anomaly. A precise categorization was reached in 38 out of 39 types studied. Only one case of a bizarre uterine anomaly, with no clear embryological defect, could not be categorized and thus was placed in Class 6 (un-classified) of the ESHRE/ESGE system. The review of the literature was thorough but we cannot rule out the possibility that other defects exist which will also require testing in the new ESHRE/ESGE system. These anomalies, however, must be rare. The comprehensiveness of the ESHRE/ESGE classification adds objective scientific validity to its use. This may, therefore, promote its further dissemination and acceptance, which will have a positive outcome in clinical care and research. None.