Cargando…

The Thessaloniki ESHRE/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies

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. Accu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Grimbizis, Grigoris F., Di Spiezio Sardo, Attilio, Saravelos, Sotirios H., Gordts, Stephan, Exacoustos, Caterina, Van Schoubroeck, Dominique, Bermejo, Carmina, Amso, Nazar N., Nargund, Geeta, Timmermann, Dirk, Athanasiadis, Apostolos, Brucker, Sara, De Angelis, Carlo, Gergolet, Marco, Li, Tin Chiu, Tanos, Vasilios, Tarlatzis, Basil, Farquharson, Roy, Gianaroli, Luca, Campo, Rudi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4753246/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26918000
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10397-015-0909-1
_version_ 1782415830770778112
author Grimbizis, Grigoris F.
Di Spiezio Sardo, Attilio
Saravelos, Sotirios H.
Gordts, Stephan
Exacoustos, Caterina
Van Schoubroeck, Dominique
Bermejo, Carmina
Amso, Nazar N.
Nargund, Geeta
Timmermann, Dirk
Athanasiadis, Apostolos
Brucker, Sara
De Angelis, Carlo
Gergolet, Marco
Li, Tin Chiu
Tanos, Vasilios
Tarlatzis, Basil
Farquharson, Roy
Gianaroli, Luca
Campo, Rudi
author_facet Grimbizis, Grigoris F.
Di Spiezio Sardo, Attilio
Saravelos, Sotirios H.
Gordts, Stephan
Exacoustos, Caterina
Van Schoubroeck, Dominique
Bermejo, Carmina
Amso, Nazar N.
Nargund, Geeta
Timmermann, Dirk
Athanasiadis, Apostolos
Brucker, Sara
De Angelis, Carlo
Gergolet, Marco
Li, Tin Chiu
Tanos, Vasilios
Tarlatzis, Basil
Farquharson, Roy
Gianaroli, Luca
Campo, Rudi
author_sort Grimbizis, Grigoris F.
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4753246
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47532462016-02-23 The Thessaloniki ESHRE/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies Grimbizis, Grigoris F. Di Spiezio Sardo, Attilio Saravelos, Sotirios H. Gordts, Stephan Exacoustos, Caterina Van Schoubroeck, Dominique Bermejo, Carmina Amso, Nazar N. Nargund, Geeta Timmermann, Dirk Athanasiadis, Apostolos Brucker, Sara De Angelis, Carlo Gergolet, Marco Li, Tin Chiu Tanos, Vasilios Tarlatzis, Basil Farquharson, Roy Gianaroli, Luca Campo, Rudi Gynecol Surg Opinion 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. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2015-11-04 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4753246/ /pubmed/26918000 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10397-015-0909-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2015 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Opinion
Grimbizis, Grigoris F.
Di Spiezio Sardo, Attilio
Saravelos, Sotirios H.
Gordts, Stephan
Exacoustos, Caterina
Van Schoubroeck, Dominique
Bermejo, Carmina
Amso, Nazar N.
Nargund, Geeta
Timmermann, Dirk
Athanasiadis, Apostolos
Brucker, Sara
De Angelis, Carlo
Gergolet, Marco
Li, Tin Chiu
Tanos, Vasilios
Tarlatzis, Basil
Farquharson, Roy
Gianaroli, Luca
Campo, Rudi
The Thessaloniki ESHRE/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies
title The Thessaloniki ESHRE/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies
title_full The Thessaloniki ESHRE/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies
title_fullStr The Thessaloniki ESHRE/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies
title_full_unstemmed The Thessaloniki ESHRE/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies
title_short The Thessaloniki ESHRE/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies
title_sort thessaloniki eshre/esge consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies
topic Opinion
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4753246/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26918000
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10397-015-0909-1
work_keys_str_mv AT grimbizisgrigorisf thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT dispieziosardoattilio thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT saravelossotiriosh thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT gordtsstephan thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT exacoustoscaterina thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT vanschoubroeckdominique thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT bermejocarmina thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT amsonazarn thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT nargundgeeta thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT timmermanndirk thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT athanasiadisapostolos thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT bruckersara thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT deangeliscarlo thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT gergoletmarco thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT litinchiu thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT tanosvasilios thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT tarlatzisbasil thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT farquharsonroy thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT gianaroliluca thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT camporudi thethessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT grimbizisgrigorisf thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT dispieziosardoattilio thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT saravelossotiriosh thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT gordtsstephan thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT exacoustoscaterina thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT vanschoubroeckdominique thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT bermejocarmina thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT amsonazarn thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT nargundgeeta thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT timmermanndirk thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT athanasiadisapostolos thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT bruckersara thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT deangeliscarlo thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT gergoletmarco thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT litinchiu thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT tanosvasilios thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT tarlatzisbasil thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT farquharsonroy thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT gianaroliluca thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies
AT camporudi thessalonikieshreesgeconsensusondiagnosisoffemalegenitalanomalies