https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5560-3402
References
- Moore KL, Persaud TVN, Torchia MG. Before we are born: essentials of embryology and birth defects. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2015.
- Rackow BW, Arici A. Reproductive performance of women with müllerian anomalies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2007;19(3):229–237.
- 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;17(6):761–771.
- Grimbizis GF, Camus M, Tarlatzis BC, et al. Clinical implications of uterine malformations and hysteroscopic treatment results. Hum Reprod Update. 2001;7(2):161–174.
- Simón C, Martinez L, Pardo F, et al. Müllerian defects in women with normal reproductive outcome. Fertil Steril. 1991;56(6):1192–1193.
- Acién P. Incidence of Müllerian defects in fertile and infertile women. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 1997;12:1372–1376.
- 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;49:944–955.
- Reichman DE, Laufer MR. Congenital uterine anomalies affecting reproduction. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2010;24(2):193–208.
- Hiersch L, Yeoshoua E, Miremberg H, et al. The association between Mullerian anomalies and short-term pregnancy outcome. J Matern-Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29:2573–2578.
- Chan YY, Jayaprakasan K, Tan A, et al. Reproductive outcomes in women with congenital uterine anomalies: a systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;38(4):371–382.
- Cahen-Peretz A, Sheiner E, Friger M, et al. The association between Müllerian anomalies and perinatal outcome. J Matern-Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019;32(1):51–57.
- Hua M, Odibo AO, Longman RE, et al. Congenital uterine anomalies and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205(6):558.e1-5–558.e5.
- Dollberg S, Haklai Z, Mimouni FB, et al. Birth weight standards in the live-born population in Israel. Isr Med Assoc J. 2005;7(5):311–314.
- Nahum GG. Uterine anomalies. How common are they, and what is their distribution among subtypes? J Reprod Med. 1998;43:877–887.
- Dreisler E, Stampe Sørensen S. Müllerian duct anomalies diagnosed by saline contrast sonohysterography: prevalence in a general population. Fertil Steril. 2014;102(2):525–529.
- Fox NS, Roman AS, Stern EM, et al. Type of congenital uterine anomaly and adverse pregnancy outcomes. J Matern-Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27(9):949–953.
- Raga F, Bauset C, Remohi J, et al. Reproductive impact of congenital Müllerian anomalies. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 1997;12(10):2277–2281.
- Kupesic S. Clinical implications of sonographic detection of uterine anomalies for reproductive outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001;18(4):387–400.
- Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman MJK. Births in the United States. NCHS Data Brief. 2018;2019:1–8.
- Hehir MP, Ananth CV, Siddiq Z, et al. Cesarean delivery in the United States 2005 through 2014: a population-based analysis using the Robson 10-group classification system. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;219(1):105.e1–105.e11.
- Mastrolia SA, Baumfeld Y, Hershkovitz R, et al. Bicornuate uterus is an independent risk factor for cervical os insufficiency: a retrospective population based cohort study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2017;30(22):2705–2710.
- Dabirashrafi H, Bahadori M, Mohammad K, et al. Septate uterus: new idea on the histologic features of the septum in this abnormal uterus. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;172(1):105–107.