References
- 1. Chan YY, Jayaprakasan, K, Zamora J, et al. The prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies in unselected and high-risk populations: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2011 November; 17(6): 761–771.
- 2. Lin P, Bhatnagar K, Nettleton S, Nakajima S. Female genital anomalies affecting reproduction. Fertil Steril. 2002 Nov; 78(5): 899–915.
- 3. Propst AM, Hill JA 3rd. Anatomic factors associated with recurrent pregnancy loss. Semin Reprod Med. 2000; 18(4): 341–50. Review.
- 4. Raga F, Bauset C, Remohi J, Bonilla-Musoles F, Simon C, Pellicer A. Reproductive impact of congenital Mullerian anomalies. Hum Reprod. 1997; 12 (10): 2277–2281.
- 5. Speroff L, Glass RH, Kase NG. Development of the mullerian system. In: Mitchell C, eds. Clinical gyne cologic endocrinology and infertility. 6th ed Balti more, Md: Williams & Wilkins, Lippincott, 1998; 124.
- 6. Harger JH, Archer DF, Marchese SG, et al. Etiology of recurrent pregnancy losses and outcome of subse quent pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 1983; 62: 574–581.
- 7. The American Fertility Society classifications of adnexal adhesions, distal tubal obstruction, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, mullerian anomalies and intrauterine adhesions. Fertil Steril. 1988; 49: 944–55.
- 8. Saravelos SH, Cocksedge KA, Li TC. Prevalence and diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies in women with reproductive failure: a critical appraisal. Hum Reprod Update. 2008 Sep-Oct; 14(5): 415–29.
- 9. Shokeir TA, Shalan HM, El-Shafei MM. Combined diagnostic approach of laparoscopy and hysteroscopy in the evaluation of female infertility: results of 612 patients. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2004 Feb; 30(1): 9–14.
- 10. Hourvitz A, Ledee N, Gervaise A, Fernandez H, Frydman R, Olivennes F. Should diagnostic hysteroscopy be a routine procedure during diagnostic laparoscopy in women with normal hysterosalpingography? Reprod Biomed Online. 2002 May–Jun; 4(3): 256–60.
- 11. Daly DC, Maier D, Soto-Albors C. Hysteroscopic metroplasty: six years experience. Obstet Gynecol. 1989; 73: 201–5.
- 12. Fedele L, Bianchi S. Hysteroscopic metroplasty for septate uterus. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 1995; 22: 473–489.
- 13. Grimbizis G, Camus M, Tarlatzis BC, Bontis JN, Devroey P. Clinical implications of uterine malfor mations and hysteroscopic treatment results. Hum Reprod Update. 2001; 7(2): 161–74.
- 14. Grimbizis G, Camus M, Clasen K, Tournaye H, De Munck L, Devroey P. Hysteroscopic septum resection in patients with recurrent abortions or infertility. Hum Reprod. 1998; 13: 1188–1193.
- 15. Jacobsen LJ, De Cherney A. Results of conventional and hysteroscopic surgery. Hum Reprod. 1997; 12: 1376–1381.
- 16. Pellicer A. Shall we operate Mullerian defects? An introduction to the debate. Hum Reprod 1997; 12: 1371–1372.
- 17. Jones WH. Mullerian anomalies. Hum Reprod. 1998; 13: 789–791.
- 18. Homer HA, Li T, Cooke ID. The septate uterus: a review of management and reproductive outcome. Fertil Steril. 2000; 73: 1–14.
- 19. Wilcox AJ, Weinberg CR, O'Connor JF, et al: Inci dence of early loss of pregnancy. N Engl J Med. 1988; 319: 189.
- 20. Mills JL, Simpson JL, Driscoll SG, et al: Incidence of spontaneous abortion among normal women and insulin-dependent diabetic women whose pregnan cies were identified within 21 days of conception. N Engl J Med. 1988; 319: 1617.
- 21. Simpson JL, Mills JL, Holmes LB, et al: Low fetal loss rates after ultrasound-proved viability in early pregnancy. JAMA 1987; 258: 2555.
- 22. Wilson RD, Kendrick V, Wittmann BK, et al: Risk of spontaneous abortion in ultrasonically normal pregnancies. Lancet. 1984; 2: 920.
- 23. Gilmore DH, McNay MB: Spontaneous fetal loss rate in early pregnancy. Lancet. 1985; 1: 107.
- 24. Hoesli IM, Walter-Gobel I, Tercanli S, et al: Spon taneous fetal loss rates in a non-selected population. Am J Med Genet. 2001; 100: 106.
- 25. Ford HB, Schust DJ. Reccurent pregnancy loss: etiology, diagnosis and therapy. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Spring; 2(2): 76–83.
- 26. Regan L: A prospective study on spontaneous abortion. In Beard RW, Sharp F (eds): Early Pregnancy Loss: Mechanisms and Treatment, London, Sprin-ger-Verlag. 1988, p 22.
- 27. Knudsen UB, Hansen V, Juul S, Secher NJ. Progno sis of a new pregnancy following previous sponta neous abortions. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1991; 39: 31–36.
- 28. Acien P. Reproductive performance of women with uterine malformations. Hum Reprod. 1993; 8: 122–126.
- 29. Buttram CV. Mullerian anomalies and their manage ment. Fertil Steril. 1983; 40: 159–163.
- 30. Heinonen KP, Saarikoski S, Postynen P. Repro ductive performance of women with uterine anoma lies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1982; 61: 157–162.
- 31. Sendag F, Mermer T, Yucebilgin S, et al. Repro ductive outcomes after hysteroscopic metroplasty for uterine septum. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 37(4): 287–9.
- 32. Nouri K, Ott J, Huber JC, Fischer EM, et al. Repro ductive outcome after hysteroscopic septoplasty in patients with septate uterus – a retrospective cohort study and systematic review of the literature Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2010; 8: 52.
- 33. Saygili E, Yildiz S, Erman-AkarM, et al. Repro ductive outcome of septate uterus after hysteroscopic metroplasty. Arch Gynecolog Obstet. 2003; 268: 289–292.
- 34. Fedele L, Bianchi S, Frontino G. Septums and synechiae:approaches to surgical correction. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 49: 767–788.
- 35. Roy KK, Singla S, Baruah J, et al. Reproductive outcome following hysteroscopic septal resection in patients with infertility and recurrent abortions. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011; 283: 273–279.