Skip to main content
Download PDF

Short-term reproductive outcomes analysis and prediction of the modified uterine stent treatment for mild to moderate intrauterine adhesions: experience at a single institution

BMC Women's Health volume 24, Article number: 252 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

To evaluate the efficacy of modified uterine stent in the treatment of mild-to-moderate intrauterine adhesions and explore the relative indicators affecting prognosis prediction.

Methods

A total of 115 patients with mild-to-moderate intrauterine adhesions received a modified uterine stent placement after hysteroscopy adhesiolysis. The second-look hysteroscopy operated after 3 months surgery, and the third-look hysteroscopy operated after 6 months surgery if necessary. The stent was removed when the cavity shape was repaired, then the reproductive outcomes were followed up one year.

Results

Menstrual blood volume, endometrial thickness and volume had increased significantly after 3 months surgery. The rates of cavity repaired were 86.96% (100/115) after 3 months surgery and 100% (115/115) after 6 months surgery cumulatively. Endometrial thickness after 3-months surgery was positively associated with uterine cavity shape repaired (P<0.01). The receive operating characteristic (ROC) curve showed the rate of uterine cavity shape repaired predicted by the model was 0.92, based on the endometrial thickness after 3-months surgery. The rate of pregnancy was 86.09% (99/115) in one year, while the rate of miscarriage accounted for 26.26% (26/99). The median time interval between stent removal and subsequent conception was 3 months. It showed adhesion recurrence was the risk factor for subsequent pregnancy (P<0.01).

Conclusions

A modified uterine stent placement under hysteroscopy was an effective approach for mild-to-moderate intrauterine adhesions, which is easy to operate and worthy for clinical promotion. Endometrial thickness measured by ultrasonography probably has predictive value in adhesion recurrence and subsequent pregnancy.

Trial Registration

ChiCTR2100051524.

Date of registration (retrospectively registered): 26/09/2021.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Intrauterine adhesions (IUAs), known as Asherman syndrome, have been first reported in 1894 [1]. It is the scarring disease in essence, characterized by uterine cavity narrowed and thin endometrium [2,3,4]. IUAs may be associated with abnormal menstruation, recurrent pregnancy loss, secondary infertility, and pregnancy complications [5,6,7,8]. In recent years, the incidence of IUAs has increased worldwide as a result of the high rate of induced abortion and the improvement of diagnostic techniques, such as three-dimensional ultrasonography and office hysteroscopy [9, 10].

Hysteroscopic adhesiolysis is the optimum route for treatment of IUAs [9, 11,12,13]. However, the rate of recurrence is 30% to 66% [12,13,14]. It is a knotty problem to prevent adhesion recurrence after surgery. To date, many approaches have become available, including cross-linked hyaluronic acid gel, balloon catheter and intrauterine device (IUD) [12, 15, 16]. There is still no consensus regarding the optimal postoperative treatment of IUAs [17]. In our hospital, IUAs has been treated with hysteroscopic procedures for more than 20 years. This retrospective study aimed to report our experience with a modified uterine stent placement under hysteroscopy treatment of mild-to-moderate IUAs and describe the short-term outcomes.

Materials and methods

Ethical approval

Patients who were diagnosed with mild-to-moderate IUAs treated with the modified uterine stent placement after hysteroscopy adhesiolysis in outpatient from October 2020 to March 2021 were retrospectively studied. The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the first affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University (approval number 2020-572). Informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Study design

Adult women with hypomenorrhea, infertility, or recurrent spontaneous abortion were confirmed by office hysteroscopy. The eligibility criteria were women with strong pregnancy desire and diagnosed as mild (1-4 points) or moderate (5-8 points) IUAs with the American Fertility Society (AFS) classification of intrauterine adhesions [18]. The exclusion criteria were as follows: infertility caused by tubal, endocrine or male factors; congenital uterine malformation; IUAs caused by endometrial tuberculosis or uterine artery embolism; and diseases with submucous myoma, adenomyosis, or endometrial polyp.

Two senior surgeons using 5.5 mm diameter hysteroscope (Stryker, American) performed all operations. All cases received adhesiolysis by scope or minisize scissor to restore the anatomy of the uterine cavity, then a modified uterine stent was placed immediately into uterine cavity to maintain the cavity shape. The stent was made from a round stainless-steel containing copper (OCu200-21, Wuxi Tianyi Medical devices Co. LTD, China) packed by an anti-adhesive membrane of Chitosan (Guangzhou Hong Jian Bio-Medical Products Co. LTD, China) (Fig. 1). The second-look hysteroscopy operated after 3 months surgery. When the stent was embedded in adhesive tissue, we called it as stent incarceration or adhesion recurrence, it considered the cavity shape was not repaired, the new stent was replaced for another three months, then the third-look hysteroscopy operated; when there was no stent incarceration, it considered the uterine cavity shape was repaired, and the stent was removed.

Fig. 1
figure 1

The process description of treatment and ultrasonography: A1-2 A round-shaped stainless-steel IUD packed by an anti-adhesive membrane of Chitosan; B1-2 The modified uterine stent was in uterine cavity; C1-3 The types of IUAs; D The uterine cavity after adhesiolysis immediately; E The uterine cavity and the stent (Chitosan membrane had been degraded) at the second-look hysteroscopy; F1-3 Adhesion recurrence appeared as device incarceration at the second-look hysteroscopy; G The endometrial thickness measured by 2D- TVUS; H The endometrial volume measured by 3D- TVUS; I1 It prompted the stent incarcerated, I2 It prompted the cavity repaired well without the stent incarcerated. 2D-TVUS: two-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound; 3D-TVUS: three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound

Full size image

Endometrial thickness and endometrial volume were measured by transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) (GE VOLUSON E8, USA) during the mid-luteal phase of patients’ menstrual cycle. Menstrual blood volume and pregnancy outcomes were collected. The termination time of follow-up was at July 1, 2022. Only data providing from women with the persistent pregnancy desire and completed the whole procedure were finally included in the analysis.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analyses were performed with SAS 9.4. Continous data were presented as mean±SD for normal distribution and medians (interquartile ranges) for skewed distribution. Continuous data were compared by Student’s t-test, analysis of variance, non-parametric test, or the Kruskal-Wallis test, as appropriate. Categorical data were expressed as frequencies and compared by chi-square test. Logistic regression analysis was used to explore the specific relationship between variables. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and Youden index were used to predict uterine cavity restored and subsequent pregnancy. All tests were two-tailed, and P<.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.

Results

From October 2020 to March 2021, 142 patients underwent the whole procedures for eligibility without perforation, infection and other complications. 27 patients were excluded, because they suspended planning to have children. 115 patients (age 31.03±4.07 years, gravidity 2.77±1.48 times, Parity 0.43±0.58 times) were included in the analysis. Among them, the mild IUAs accounted for 18.26% (21/115), and the moderate IUAs accounted for 81.74% (94/115), respectively (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Distribution of outcome

Full size image

Clinical Characteristics before and after 3 months surgery

70 (60.87%) cases got the menstrual blood volume increased. Endometrial thickness and endometrial volume (Fig. 1) had significantly increased after 3-months than those before surgery (P<0.0001) (Table 1).

Table 1 The endometrial thickness and volume before surgery were compared with those after 3 months surgery
Full size table

Hysteroscopy and Ultrasonography Characteristics at the second or third look

The shape of uterine cavity and the stent position had been evaluated by ultrasonography and hysteroscopy (Fig. 1). The rates of cavity repaired were 86.96% (100/115) at the second look hysteroscopy and 100% (15/15) at the third look hysteroscopy cumulatively. 15 (13.04%) cases with adhesion recurrence had stent incarcerated in the newly formed scar at the second-look hysteroscopy. However, their uterine cavities were all maintained at the third-look hysteroscopy.

The endometrial thickness and volume measured before and after 3-months surgery were significantly greater in patients with uterine cavity shape repaired than those in patients without repaired at the second-look hysteroscopy (P<0.01) (Table 2). Stepwise logistic regression analysis showed that endometrial thickness not endometrial volume measured after 3-months surgery was positively associated with uterine cavity shape repaired (P<0.01) (Table 3). Despite the scatter plots showed that endometrial thickness and volume these were significant correlation (Fig. 3). The ROC curve showed that the model of endometrial thickness measured after 3-months surgery predicted the rate of uterine cavity shape repaired was 0.92 when it was 7 mm (Fig. 4).

Table 2 Comparison general conditions in patients with and without uterine cavity repaired at the second look hysteroscopy
Full size table
Table 3 Analysis of affecting factors for uterine cavity shape repaired
Full size table
Fig. 3
figure 3

Scatter plots of endometrial thickness and volume: A Scatter plots of endometrial thickness and volume before surgery. B Scatter plots of endometrial thickness and volume after 3-month surgery

Full size image
Fig. 4
figure 4

The ROC curve of the endometrial thickness predication model for uterine cavity shape repaired at the second look hysteroscopy: It predicted by the model is 0.92 (area under the curve =0.9873; sensitivity = 92.0%; specificity = 100%) based on endometrial thickness after 3-month surgery when the endometrial thickness was 7 mm

Full size image

Short-term pregnancy outcomes

The median time interval between stent removal and subsequent conception was 3 months (ranged from 1 to 12 months). 99(86.09%) patients had pregnancy spontaneously, no patient got more than one conception during one year of follow-up (Fig. 5), while the rate of miscarriage accounted for 26.26% (26/99).

Fig. 5
figure 5

The time interval between stent removal and subsequent conception distribution within one year: A The number and time interval distribution of conception; B Cumulative conception distribution with time interval

Full size image

There was no factor affecting the time interval between the stent removal and subsequent conception (P>0.05) (Fig. 6). The rate of pregnancy in patients (90%, 90/100) with cavity shape repaired at the second-look hysteroscopy was significantly higher than those (60%, 9/15) without repaired (P<0.01) (Table 4). Logistic regression analysis showed that adhesion recurrence was the risk factor for pregnancy (P<0.01) (Table 5). The ROC curve showed that the rate of pregnancy in one year was as high as 85.9%, when the endometrial thickness measured after 3-months surgery was more than 6.5mm; the rate of pregnancy in one year can be as high as 83.8%, when the endometrial volume measured after 3-months surgery was more than 3.58cm3 (Fig. 7). Regretfully, it had no predictive value. Analysis of the risk factors for miscarriage found that only maternal age was positively associated with miscarriage (P<0.05) (Table 6).

Fig. 6
figure 6

Analysis the factors after 3-months surgery affecting the time interval between stent removal and subsequent conception: A Scatter plots of the endometrial thickness and the time interval：Pearson correlation P=0.9199, Spearman correlation P=0.6728; B Scatter plots of the endometrial volume and the time interval: Pearson correlation P=0.7813, Spearman correlation P=0.6654; C The relationship between adhesion recurrence and the time interval (P=0.4290)

Full size image
Table 4 Comparison the general conditions in pregnant patients and non-pregnant patients
Full size table
Table 5 Analysis of the affecting factors for getting pregnant
Full size table
Fig. 7
figure 7

The ROC curve of the endometrial thickness and volume after 3-months surgery predication model for getting pregnant in one year: A The ROC curve of endometrial thickness; B The ROC curve of endometrial volume

Full size image
Table 6 Analysis of the affecting factors for miscarriage
Full size table

Discussion

After intrauterine surgery trauma, infection and other factors lead to the injury of the endometrial basal layer, the surface of the uterine cavity will appear lack of epithelial cell coverage, interstitial exposure, inflammatory cell infiltration and collagen deposition, which will lead to endometrial fibrosis and eventually intrauterine adhesions [19, 20]. Hysteroscopic adhesiolysis is the optimum route for treatment of IUAs [9, 11,12,13]. To prevent adhesion recurrence after surgery, many approaches have been used in clinic, including amnion graft, cross-linked hyaluronic acid gel, IUD, estrogen therapy and so on [12, 15, 16]. It is reported that the rates of adhesion recurrence were 15.4%-48%, 13.4%-20.2%, 54.3% and 32.6%, respectively, in using amnion graft, cross-linked hyaluronic acid gel, IUD and estrogen therapy after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis [12, 21,22,23,24].

Although the mild to moderate IUAs do not lead to amenorrhea, they often lead to repeated early pregnancy loss and even embryo implantation failure due to the characteristic of thin endometrium. Therefore, the patients with fertility requirement also need treatment. As we all know, the degree of adhesion may be aggravated after surgery if there is no effective measure to inhibit scar growth. So, gynecologist is usually cautious to perform surgery for the mild to moderate IUAs, especially for the marginal type of adhesions. In this study, adhesive tissues were separated followed a modified stent placement immediately. It has many potential advantages. Firstly, the endometrial thickness and endometrial volume significantly increased; Secondly, the rate of adhesion recurrence was only 13.04%, lower than that reported in the literatures [12, 21,22,23,24]; Thirdly, the pregnancy rate in one year after stent removal was 86.09%, which was higher than those before reported [25,26,27]. In addition, the operation is easy and convenient without thermal damage to the remaining endometrium [28]. Lastly, the modified stent was available and inexpensive in clinical. Finally, the modified uterine stent is composed of a stainless-steel metal ring and anti-adhesive membrane of Chitosan, which is partially biodegradable in three months and has good mechanical support properties. When placed in the uterine cavity, there is no inflammatory and immunogenic stimulation to the endometrium, and it can be used continuously to prevent uterine cavity contractures. Thus, the scheme of adhesiolysis with a modified stent to treat the mild to moderate IUAs is worth our attention.

In this study, we tried to predict the prognosis of patients by non-invasive ultrasonographic indicators. Which can reflect endometrial receptivity, including endometrial thickness, pattern and blood flow, endometrial echo, peristalsis, volume, and endometrial-myometrial junctional zone [29,30,31,32]. It was limited reported in previous studies. We use ultrasound method making the endometrial thickness and endometrial volume numeric vectors, compared with hysteroscopy evaluation, ultrasound measurement endometrial thickness is more objective. It showed that endometrial thickness and volume might reflect the uterine cavity environment, especially the endometrial thickness after 3-months surgery. Because of the combination of antiadhesion membrane and metal ring, the stent can perfectly maintain the uterine cavity shape and inhibit scar contracture within 3 months after surgery. Therefore, it is not necessary to repeat hysteroscopy during this period, only to detect the endometrial thickness by ultrasonography to predict the recovery of the uterine cavity environment. However, when the anti-adhesion membrane is completely dissolved after 3 months, hysteroscopy should be performed in time to remove the bare metal ring that may affect growth of the endometrium or replace a new stent, possible new adhesions were also isolated at the same time. This series of procedures cannot be replaced by ultrasound examination. We suggest that it may attempt to use ultrasonography as a non-invasive method to follow up IUAs after surgery, reduce the number of repeated hysteroscopies. It is believed that with the progress of ultrasound equipment, non-invasive ultrasonographic prediction should be more accurate with more indicators including blood flow, endometrial echo, peristalsis and son on. Non-invasive monitoring after IUA surgery should be standardized.

At present, there is no effective biomedical material to promote endometrial repair and regeneration for the clinical treatment of intrauterine adhesions [19]. The main purpose of the modified stent is to maintain the uterine cavity shape as long as possible to inhibit scar growth until the endometrium itself functional regeneration. The stent does not appear to have the function to directly promote endometrium regeneration. However, we are pleased to discover a significant increase in endometrial thickness after stent placement and a pregnancy rate of 86.09% within one year. Future exploration will be to select suitable biodegradable materials to construct scaffolds or stent loaded with therapeutic drugs or stem cells to enhance endometrial regeneration.

Availability of data and materials

Data and other materials can be made available by the corresponding author upon a reasonable request.

Abbreviations

ROC:

Receive operating characteristic

IUAs:

Intrauterine adhesions

IUD:

Intrauterine device

TVUS:

Transvaginal ultrasound

AFS:

American Fertility Society

References

  1. Fritsh H. Ein Fall von volligem Schwund ser Gebarmutterhohle nach Auskratzung. Zentralbl Gynaekol. 1894;18:1337–42.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Jin X, Ye J, Zhang L, Chen L. Efficacy of hysteroscopic cold knife separation on intrauterine adhesions. Am J Transl Res. 2021;13(7):8351–7 PMID: 34377327; PMCID: PMC8340206.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Smikle C, Yarrarapu SNS, Khetarpal S. Asherman Syndrome. 2023 Jul 24. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan–. PMID: 28846336.

  4. Parashar S, Pajai S, Tarang T. Recent Advancement in the Management of Intrauterine Adhesions Using Stem Cell Therapy: A Review Article. Cureus. 2023;15(8):e43553. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.43553. PMID: 37719487; PMCID: PMC10502444.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Hong W, Wu Z, Li L, Wang B, Li X. Intrauterine adhesions treated with hysteroscopic adhesiolysis and subsequent obstetric outcome: A retrospective matched cohort study. BJOG. 2024 https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.17793. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 38418403.

  6. Wu F, Lei N, Yang S, Zhou J, Chen M, Chen C, et al. Treatment strategies for intrauterine adhesion: focus on the exosomes and hydrogels. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2023;31(11):1264006. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2023.1264006. PMID: 37720318; PMCID: PMC10501405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhuang LL, Wang K, Shen HL, Lin JH, Lu Y, Luo ZY, et al. A comparison of special intrauterine balloons and intrauterine contraceptive devices in the treatment of intrauterine adhesions. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2023;307(6):1873–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-023-06993-y. Epub 2023 Mar 10. PMID: 36897397; PMCID: PMC10147804.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Lee WL, Liu CH, Cheng M, Chang WH, Liu WM, Wang PH. Focus on the Primary Prevention of Intrauterine Adhesions: Current Concept and Vision. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(10):5175. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22105175. PMID: 34068335; PMCID: PMC8153321.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Jiang X, Chen X, Li J, Wang W, Li J. Clinical application of three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasonography in the diagnosis of intrauterine adhesions. J Int Med Res. 2021;49(11):3000605211024520. https://doi.org/10.1177/03000605211024520. PMID: 34842482; PMCID: PMC8649470.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lei L, Zou L, Yu Y, Li W, Zhang A, Xu D. A Novel Nomogram Based on 3-dimensional Transvaginal Ultrasound for Differential Diagnosis Between Severe and Mild-to-Moderate Intrauterine Adhesions. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2022;29(7):862–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2022.04.002. Epub 2022 Apr 10 PMID: 35417800.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Baradwan S, Alharbi D, Bashir MS, Saleh A, Al-Jaroudi D. Short and long-term reproductive outcomes after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis for infertile women. JBRA Assist Reprod. 2023;27(2):191–6. https://doi.org/10.5935/1518-0557.20220016. PMID: 35616443; PMCID: PMC10279438.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. AAGL Elevating Gynecologic Surgery. AAGL Practice Report: Practice Guidelines on Intrauterine Adhesions Developed in Collaboration with the European Society of Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE). J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017;24(5):695–705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2016.11.008. Epub 2017 May 1 PMID: 28473177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Di Guardo F, Della Corte L, Vilos GA, Carugno J, Török P, Giampaolino P, et al. Evaluation and treatment of infertile women with Asherman syndrome: an updated review focusing on the role of hysteroscopy. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;41(1):55–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.03.021. Epub 2020 Apr 28 PMID: 32444259.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Zhao J, Zhang L, Liang J, Zhao H, Wang Z, Pang Y. The effect of the combined use of an intrauterine device and a Foley balloon in the prevention of adhesion following hysteroscopic adhesiolysis. Women Health. 2023;63(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/03630242.2022.2144984. Epub 2022 Dec 8 PMID: 36482732.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ekin M, Kaya C, Erdoğan ŞV, Bahçeci E, Baghaki S, Yaşar L. The effect of new cross linked hyaluronan gel on quality of life of patients after deep infiltrating endometriosis surgery: a randomized controlled pilot study. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2021;41(2):263–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443615.2020.1755628. Epub 2020 Jun 12 PMID: 32530335.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kaya C, Sever N, Cengiz H, Yıldız Ş, Ekin M, Yaşar L. A randomized controlled study of the efficacy of misoprostol and hyaluronic acid in preventing adhesion formation after gynecological surgery: a rat uterine horn model. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;176:44–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.02.033. Epub 2014 Mar 2 PMID: 24655554.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ma J, Zhan H, Li W, Zhang L, Yun F, Wu R, et al. Recent trends in therapeutic strategies for repairing endometrial tissue in intrauterine adhesion. Biomater Res. 2021;25(1):40. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40824-021-00242-6. PMID: 34819167; PMCID: PMC8611984.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. The American Fertility Society classifications of adnexal adhesions. distal tubal occlusion, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, müllerian anomalies and intrauterine adhesions. Fertil Steril. 1988;49(6):944–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(16)59942-7. PMID: 3371491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. LIU Shu-chen, ZHU Xue-Hong, Bin Li et al. Mesenchymal stem cells in the endometrial injury repair mechanism research progress [J]. Journal of jiang Su university (medical edition), 2023 (01): 84-92. The DOI: 10.13312 / j. iSSN.1671-7783. Y220008

  20. Hu X, Wu H, Yong X, Wang Y, Yang S, Fan D, et al. Cyclical endometrial repair and regeneration: Molecular mechanisms, diseases, and therapeutic interventions. MedComm (2020). 2023;4(6):e425. https://doi.org/10.1002/mco2.425. PMID: 38045828; PMCID: PMC10691302.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Vitale SG, Riemma G, Carugno J, Perez-Medina T, Alonso Pacheco L, Haimovich S, et al. Postsurgical barrier strategies to avoid the recurrence of intrauterine adhesion formation after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;226(4):487-498.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2021.09.015. Epub 2021 Sep 30 PMID: 34555319.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Guo Y, Shi X, Song D, Liu Y, Huang X, Xiao Y, et al. The efficacy of auto-cross-linked hyaluronic acid gel in addition to oestradiol and intrauterine balloon insertion in the prevention of adhesion reformation after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2022;45(3):501–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2022.04.017. Epub 2022 May 5 PMID: 35760666.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wang YQ, Song XH, Wu SL, Huang YZ, Yan L, Li CZ. Comparison of Autocross-Linked Hyaluronic Acid Gel and Intrauterine Device for Preventing Intrauterine Adhesions in Infertile Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther. 2020;9(2):74–80. https://doi.org/10.4103/GMIT.GMIT_103_19. PMID: 32676284; PMCID: PMC7354758.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Yang L, Ma N, Song D, Huang X, Zhou Q, Guo Y, et al. The Effect of Estrogen in the Prevention of Adhesion Reformation after Hysteroscopic Adhesiolysis: A Prospective Randomized Control Trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2022;29(7):871–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2022.04.004. Epub 2022 Apr 16 PMID: 35439645.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Feng Q, Gao B, Huang H, Woo JJ, Zou L, Zhao X, et al. Obstetrical outcome in the third trimester after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis. Ann Transl Med. 2020;8(4):51. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2019.09.123. PMID: 32175345; PMCID: PMC7049008.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Hooker AB, Mansvelder FJ, Elbers RG, Frijmersum Z. Reproductive outcomes in women with mild intrauterine adhesions; a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2022;35(25):6933–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2021.1931103. Epub 2021 May 27 PMID: 34044740.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Baradwan S, Alharbi D, Bashir MS, Saleh A, Al-Jaroudi D. Short and long-term reproductive outcomes after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis for infertile women. JBRA Assist Reprod. 2022 May 26. https://doi.org/10.5935/1518-0557.20220016. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35616443.

  28. Yang L, Wang L, Chen Y, Guo X, Miao C, Zhao Y, et al. Cold scissors versus electrosurgery for hysteroscopic adhesiolysis: A meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2021;100(17):e25676. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000025676. PMID: 33907137; PMCID: PMC8084071.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Du J, Lu H, Yu X, Lü Z, Mi L, Zhang X. Efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma for the treatment of thin endometrium: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2020;99(3):e18848. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000018848. PMID: 32011503; PMCID: PMC7220421.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Carugno J, Laganà AS, Vitale SG. Use of 3D ultrasound in the hysteroscopic management of Asherman syndrome. Ann Transl Med. 2020;8(14):847. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2020.04.18. PMID: 32793691; PMCID: PMC7396785.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Burjoo A, Zhao X, Zou L, Liu X, Lei L, Zhang B, et al. The role of preoperative 3D-ultrasound in intraoperative judgement for hysteroscopic adhesiolysis. Ann Transl Med. 2020;8(4):55. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2020.01.06. PMID: 32175349; PMCID: PMC7049029.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Zhao X, Yang Y, Liao D, Traoré A, He S, Xu D. Correlative study of preoperative three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound findings and ongoing pregnancy/live birth in patients with intrauterine adhesions following hysteroscopic adhesiolysis: a retrospective study. Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2022;12(4):2441–53. https://doi.org/10.21037/qims-21-727. PMID: 35371937; PMCID: PMC8923839.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We greatly appreciate the support in data analysis from Professor Bin Peng (Department of Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Chongqing Medical University).

Funding

This work was supported by Chongqing Health Commission Research (No: 2021MSXM153 to QZ).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women and Children’s Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, 401147, Yubei District, Chongqing, China

    Chaoxia Cao & Xiaoli Liu

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chongqing Health Center for Women and Children, 401147, Yubei District, Chongqing, China

    Chaoxia Cao & Xiaoli Liu

  3. Chongqing Research Center for Prevention and Control of Maternal and Child Diseases and Public Health, 401147, Yubei District, Chongqing, China

    Chaoxia Cao & Xiaoli Liu

  4. Department of Mathematics, School of Mathematics and Physics, University College London, Gower St, London, WC1E 6AE, UK

    Yinan Chen

  5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China

    Jinjin Li, Ruikun Zhao & Qin Zhou

  6. Department of Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Chongqing Medical University, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China

    Qianjie Xu

  7. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chongqing Shapingba Maternity and Child Healthcare Hospital, Shapingba District, Chongqing, 401331, China

    Quanjia Jiang

Authors
  1. Chaoxia Cao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yinan Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jinjin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Qianjie Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Xiaoli Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ruikun Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Quanjia Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Qin Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Qin Zhou, Chaoxia Cao and Xiaoli Liu contributed to the study concept and design; Chaoxia Cao and Qin Zhou completed the surgery; Chaoxia Cao, Jinjin Li, Yinan Chen, Xiaoli Liu, Ruikun Zhao and Quanjia Jiang contributed to the acquisition of the data; Qianjie Xu, Yinan Chen analyzed and interpreted the data; Qin Zhou, Chaoxia Cao drafted the manuscript; Qin Zhou, Chaoxia Cao, Yinan Chen, Jinjin Li, Qianjie Xu, Ruikun Zhao and Quanjia Jiang provided critical revision of the manuscript; Qin Zhou and Xiaoli Liu supervised the study. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qin Zhou.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethics approval for the study was granted by the Ethics Committee of the first affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University (approval number 2020-572), and the informed consent was taken from all individual participants.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cao, C., Chen, Y., Li, J. et al. Short-term reproductive outcomes analysis and prediction of the modified uterine stent treatment for mild to moderate intrauterine adhesions: experience at a single institution. BMC Women's Health 24, 252 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-024-03098-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-024-03098-9

Keywords

BMC Women's Health

ISSN: 1472-6874

Contact us