The comprehensiveness of the ESHRE/ESGE classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies: a systematic review of cases not classified by the AFS system
STUDY QUESTION 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? SUMMARY ANSWER The ESHRE/ESGE classification provides a comprehensive descr...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Human reproduction (Oxford) 2015-05, Vol.30 (5), p.1046-1058 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1058 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 1046 |
container_title | Human reproduction (Oxford) |
container_volume | 30 |
creator | Di Spiezio Sardo, A. Campo, R. Gordts, S. Spinelli, M. Cosimato, C. Tanos, V. Brucker, S. Li, T. C. Gergolet, M. De Angelis, C. Gianaroli, L. Grimbizis, G. |
description | STUDY QUESTION
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?
SUMMARY ANSWER
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.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
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.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE AND DURATION
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.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS
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.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
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 cate |
doi_str_mv | 10.1093/humrep/dev061 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4400201</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/humrep/dev061</oup_id><sourcerecordid>1687350149</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-b7467173f49ff560c3f94ccdc91d6d1a794ab9bb1c3d85791798d17ddb13dec83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUFv2yAYhtG0aU27HXedOO7iBmyM7R0mVZXbTqo0qWnPCMNHw2SDZ3Cq_J390pElTbvTTiC-h-cFvQh9ouSckqZYrudhgnGpYUM4fYMWlHGS5UVJ3qIFyXmdUcrpCToN4SchaVvz9-gkL6u6Lnm5QL_v14CVH8YJ1uCC3YCDELA3OKZBu7q5a5ft6rrFqpchWGOVjNa7HWBgkD3gR3A2yh7HSaqYVO75QDqfAAvhK5Y4bENMfLQKT7Cx8LQzKBkgYOfj0Q4ad9u_0RdXq8OlD-idkX2Aj4f1DD1ctfeXN9ntj-vvlxe3mWI5iVlXMV7RqjCsMabkRBWmYUpp1VDNNZVVw2TXdB1Vha7LqqFVU2taad3RQoOqizP0be8d524ArcClL_VinOwgp63w0op_J86uxaPfCMYIyQlNgi8HweR_zRCiGGxQ0PfSgZ-DoLyuUjGUNQnN9qiafAgTmGMMJWLXq9j3Kva9Jv7z67cd6eciX7L9PP7H9QfdtLLg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1687350149</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The comprehensiveness of the ESHRE/ESGE classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies: a systematic review of cases not classified by the AFS system</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Di Spiezio Sardo, A. ; Campo, R. ; Gordts, S. ; Spinelli, M. ; Cosimato, C. ; Tanos, V. ; Brucker, S. ; Li, T. C. ; Gergolet, M. ; De Angelis, C. ; Gianaroli, L. ; Grimbizis, G.</creator><creatorcontrib>Di Spiezio Sardo, A. ; Campo, R. ; Gordts, S. ; Spinelli, M. ; Cosimato, C. ; Tanos, V. ; Brucker, S. ; Li, T. C. ; Gergolet, M. ; De Angelis, C. ; Gianaroli, L. ; Grimbizis, G.</creatorcontrib><description>STUDY QUESTION
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?
SUMMARY ANSWER
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.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
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.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE AND DURATION
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.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS
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.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
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.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION
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.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
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.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)
None.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0268-1161</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1460-2350</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dev061</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25788565</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Cervix Uteri - abnormalities ; Congenital Abnormalities - classification ; Congenital Abnormalities - diagnosis ; Europe ; Female ; Genital Diseases, Female - classification ; Genital Diseases, Female - diagnosis ; Gynecology - standards ; Humans ; Mullerian Ducts - abnormalities ; Original ; Societies, Medical ; Treatment Outcome ; Urogenital Abnormalities - classification ; Urogenital Abnormalities - diagnosis ; Uterus - abnormalities ; Vagina - abnormalities</subject><ispartof>Human reproduction (Oxford), 2015-05, Vol.30 (5), p.1046-1058</ispartof><rights>The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. 2015</rights><rights>The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-b7467173f49ff560c3f94ccdc91d6d1a794ab9bb1c3d85791798d17ddb13dec83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-b7467173f49ff560c3f94ccdc91d6d1a794ab9bb1c3d85791798d17ddb13dec83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,1578,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25788565$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Di Spiezio Sardo, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campo, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gordts, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spinelli, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cosimato, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tanos, V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brucker, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, T. C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gergolet, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Angelis, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gianaroli, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grimbizis, G.</creatorcontrib><title>The comprehensiveness of the ESHRE/ESGE classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies: a systematic review of cases not classified by the AFS system</title><title>Human reproduction (Oxford)</title><addtitle>Hum Reprod</addtitle><description>STUDY QUESTION
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?
SUMMARY ANSWER
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.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
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.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE AND DURATION
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.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS
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.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
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.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION
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.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
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.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)
None.</description><subject>Cervix Uteri - abnormalities</subject><subject>Congenital Abnormalities - classification</subject><subject>Congenital Abnormalities - diagnosis</subject><subject>Europe</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Genital Diseases, Female - classification</subject><subject>Genital Diseases, Female - diagnosis</subject><subject>Gynecology - standards</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Mullerian Ducts - abnormalities</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Societies, Medical</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Urogenital Abnormalities - classification</subject><subject>Urogenital Abnormalities - diagnosis</subject><subject>Uterus - abnormalities</subject><subject>Vagina - abnormalities</subject><issn>0268-1161</issn><issn>1460-2350</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>TOX</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkUFv2yAYhtG0aU27HXedOO7iBmyM7R0mVZXbTqo0qWnPCMNHw2SDZ3Cq_J390pElTbvTTiC-h-cFvQh9ouSckqZYrudhgnGpYUM4fYMWlHGS5UVJ3qIFyXmdUcrpCToN4SchaVvz9-gkL6u6Lnm5QL_v14CVH8YJ1uCC3YCDELA3OKZBu7q5a5ft6rrFqpchWGOVjNa7HWBgkD3gR3A2yh7HSaqYVO75QDqfAAvhK5Y4bENMfLQKT7Cx8LQzKBkgYOfj0Q4ad9u_0RdXq8OlD-idkX2Aj4f1DD1ctfeXN9ntj-vvlxe3mWI5iVlXMV7RqjCsMabkRBWmYUpp1VDNNZVVw2TXdB1Vha7LqqFVU2taad3RQoOqizP0be8d524ArcClL_VinOwgp63w0op_J86uxaPfCMYIyQlNgi8HweR_zRCiGGxQ0PfSgZ-DoLyuUjGUNQnN9qiafAgTmGMMJWLXq9j3Kva9Jv7z67cd6eciX7L9PP7H9QfdtLLg</recordid><startdate>20150501</startdate><enddate>20150501</enddate><creator>Di Spiezio Sardo, A.</creator><creator>Campo, R.</creator><creator>Gordts, S.</creator><creator>Spinelli, M.</creator><creator>Cosimato, C.</creator><creator>Tanos, V.</creator><creator>Brucker, S.</creator><creator>Li, T. C.</creator><creator>Gergolet, M.</creator><creator>De Angelis, C.</creator><creator>Gianaroli, L.</creator><creator>Grimbizis, G.</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>TOX</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150501</creationdate><title>The comprehensiveness of the ESHRE/ESGE classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies: a systematic review of cases not classified by the AFS system</title><author>Di Spiezio Sardo, A. ; Campo, R. ; Gordts, S. ; Spinelli, M. ; Cosimato, C. ; Tanos, V. ; Brucker, S. ; Li, T. C. ; Gergolet, M. ; De Angelis, C. ; Gianaroli, L. ; Grimbizis, G.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-b7467173f49ff560c3f94ccdc91d6d1a794ab9bb1c3d85791798d17ddb13dec83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Cervix Uteri - abnormalities</topic><topic>Congenital Abnormalities - classification</topic><topic>Congenital Abnormalities - diagnosis</topic><topic>Europe</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Genital Diseases, Female - classification</topic><topic>Genital Diseases, Female - diagnosis</topic><topic>Gynecology - standards</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Mullerian Ducts - abnormalities</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Societies, Medical</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Urogenital Abnormalities - classification</topic><topic>Urogenital Abnormalities - diagnosis</topic><topic>Uterus - abnormalities</topic><topic>Vagina - abnormalities</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Di Spiezio Sardo, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campo, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gordts, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spinelli, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cosimato, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tanos, V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brucker, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, T. C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gergolet, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Angelis, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gianaroli, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grimbizis, G.</creatorcontrib><collection>Oxford Journals Open Access Collection</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Human reproduction (Oxford)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Di Spiezio Sardo, A.</au><au>Campo, R.</au><au>Gordts, S.</au><au>Spinelli, M.</au><au>Cosimato, C.</au><au>Tanos, V.</au><au>Brucker, S.</au><au>Li, T. C.</au><au>Gergolet, M.</au><au>De Angelis, C.</au><au>Gianaroli, L.</au><au>Grimbizis, G.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The comprehensiveness of the ESHRE/ESGE classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies: a systematic review of cases not classified by the AFS system</atitle><jtitle>Human reproduction (Oxford)</jtitle><addtitle>Hum Reprod</addtitle><date>2015-05-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1046</spage><epage>1058</epage><pages>1046-1058</pages><issn>0268-1161</issn><eissn>1460-2350</eissn><abstract>STUDY QUESTION
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?
SUMMARY ANSWER
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.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
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.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE AND DURATION
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.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS
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.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
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.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION
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.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
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.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)
None.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>25788565</pmid><doi>10.1093/humrep/dev061</doi><tpages>13</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0268-1161 |
ispartof | Human reproduction (Oxford), 2015-05, Vol.30 (5), p.1046-1058 |
issn | 0268-1161 1460-2350 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4400201 |
source | Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Cervix Uteri - abnormalities Congenital Abnormalities - classification Congenital Abnormalities - diagnosis Europe Female Genital Diseases, Female - classification Genital Diseases, Female - diagnosis Gynecology - standards Humans Mullerian Ducts - abnormalities Original Societies, Medical Treatment Outcome Urogenital Abnormalities - classification Urogenital Abnormalities - diagnosis Uterus - abnormalities Vagina - abnormalities |
title | The comprehensiveness of the ESHRE/ESGE classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies: a systematic review of cases not classified by the AFS system |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-10T08%3A07%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20comprehensiveness%20of%20the%20ESHRE/ESGE%20classification%20of%20female%20genital%20tract%20congenital%20anomalies:%20a%20systematic%20review%20of%20cases%20not%20classified%20by%20the%20AFS%20system&rft.jtitle=Human%20reproduction%20(Oxford)&rft.au=Di%20Spiezio%20Sardo,%20A.&rft.date=2015-05-01&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1046&rft.epage=1058&rft.pages=1046-1058&rft.issn=0268-1161&rft.eissn=1460-2350&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/humrep/dev061&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1687350149%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1687350149&rft_id=info:pmid/25788565&rft_oup_id=10.1093/humrep/dev061&rfr_iscdi=true |