Assessment of pregnancy-associated, within-woman change in uterine length

References

• Esmaelzadeh S, Rezaei N, HajiAhmadi M. Normal uterine size in women of reproductive age in northern islamic republic of iran. East Mediterr Health J 2004;10:437–41
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Platt JF, Bree RL, Davidson D. Ultrasound of the normal nongravid uterus: correlation with gross and histopathology. J Clin Ultrasound 1990;18:15–19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langer JE, Oliver ER, Lev-Toaff AS, Coleman BG. Imaging of the female pelvis through the life cycle. Radiographics 2012;32:1575–97
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Egbase PE, Al-Sharhan M, Grudzinskas JG. Influence of position and length of uterus on implantation and clinical pregnancy rates in IVF and embryo transfer treatment cycles. Hum Reprod 2000;15:1943–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Negishi H, Kishida T, Yamada H, et al. Changes in uterine size after vaginal delivery and cesarean section determined by vaginal sonography in the puerperium. Arch Gynecol Obstet 1999;263:13–16
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canteiro R, Bahamondes MV, dos Santos Fernandes A, et al. Length of the endometrial cavity as measured by uterine sounding and ultrasonography in women of different parities. Contraception 2010;81:515–19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clancy KB. Reproductive ecology and the endometrium: physiology, variation, and new directions. Am J Phys Anthropol 2009;140:137–54
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leppert PC. Anatomy and physiology of cervical ripening. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1995;38:267–79
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oxlund BS, Ortoft G, Bruel A, et al. Collagen concentration and biomechanical properties of samples from the lower uterine cervix in relation to age and parity in non-pregnant women. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2010;8:82--91
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Coroleu B, Barri PN, Carreras O, et al. The influence of the depth of embryo replacement into the uterine cavity on implantation rates after IVF: a controlled, ultrasound-guided study. Hum Reprod 2002;17:341–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoolcraft WB, Surrey ES, Gardner DK. Embryo transfer: techniques and variables affecting success. Fertil Steril 2001;76:863–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lambers MJ, Dogan E, Kostelijk H, et al. Ultrasonographic-guided embryo transfer does not enhance pregnancy rates compared with embryo transfer based on previous uterine length measurement. Fertil Steril 2006;86:867–72
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Olayemi O, Omigbodun AA, Obajimi MO, et al. Ultrasound assessment of the effect of parity on postpartum uterine involution. J Obstet Gynaecol 2002;22:381–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marcus S, al-Shawaf T, Brinsden P. The obstetric outcome of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer in women with congenital uterine malformation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175:85–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavergne N, Aristizabal J, Zarka V, et al. Uterine anomalies and in vitro fertilization: what are the results? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1996;68:29–34
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mollo A, De Franciscis P, Colacurci N, et al. Hysteroscopic resection of the septum improves the pregnancy rate of women with unexplained infertility: a prospective controlled trial. Fertil Steril 2009;91:2628–31
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farhi J, Ashkenazi J, Feldberg D, et al. Effect of uterine leiomyomata on the results of in-vitro fertilization treatment. Hum Reprod 1995;10:2576–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eldar-Geva T, Meagher S, Healy DL, et al. Effect of intramural, subserosal, and submucosal uterine fibroids on the outcome of assisted reproductive technology treatment. Fertil Steril 1998;70:687–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rocket DUO IUI Catheters. [Internet]; c09/09/2011. Available from: http://www.rocketmedical.com/usa/pdf/Rocket%20DUO%20IUI%20Catheter.pdf [last accessed 16 Sep 2011]
   Google Scholar
• Tunon K, Eik-Nes SH, Grottum P, et al. Gestational age in pregnancies conceived after in vitro fertilization: a comparison between age assessed from oocyte retrieval, crown-rump length and biparietal diameter. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000;15:41–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coroleu B, Barri PN, Carreras O, et al. The influence of the depth of embryo replacement into the uterine cavity on implantation rates after IVF: a controlled, ultrasound-guided study. Hum Reprod 2002;17:341–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown J, Buckingham K, Abou-Setta AM, Buckett W. Ultrasound versus ‘clinical touch’ for catheter guidance during embryo transfer in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;(1):CD006107, 1--56
   Google Scholar
• Abou-Setta AM, Mansour RT, Al-Inany HG, et al. Among women undergoing embryo transfer, is the probability of pregnancy and live birth improved with ultrasound guidance over clinical touch alone? A systemic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized trials. Fertil Steril 2007;88:333–41
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Buckett WM. A meta-analysis of ultrasound-guided versus clinical touch embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 2003;80:1037–41
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mains L, Van Voorhis BJ. Optimizing the technique of embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 2010;94:785–90
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• de Castro A. Assessment of uterine shape and size using Kurz's cavimeter. Adv Contracept 1988;4:115–23
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wachsberg RH, Kurtz AB, Levine CD, et al. Real-time ultrasonographic analysis of the normal postpartum uterus: technique, variability, and measurements. J Ultrasound Med 1994;13:215–21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bae HS, Ahn KH, Oh MJ, et al. Postpartum uterine involution: sonographic changes in the endometrium between 2 and 6 weeks postpartum related to delivery mode and gestational age at delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012;39:727–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hearns-Stokes RM, Miller BT, Scott L, et al. Pregnancy rates after embryo transfer depend on the provider at embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 2000;74:80–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VanRees D, Bernstine RL, Crawford W. Involution of the postpartum uterus: an ultrasonic study. J Clin Ultrasound 1981;9:55–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar