Download PDF
Horm Metab Res 2015; 47(05): 329-334
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1398563
Review
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

The Female Reproductive Tract: Congenital Concerns

J. E. Dietrich
1   Division of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received 07 October 2014

accepted 18 December 2014

Publication Date:
23 February 2015 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The incidence and prevalence of conditions of the reproductive tract varies. This is related to both the complexity and spectrum of underlying and associated conditions. In some cases, only retrospective or case data are available, and likely under-reporting occurs, contributing to a lower than expected prevalence. Given the complex nature in which the reproductive tract develops in the fetus, it is important to understand the embryology, especially in situations of congenital anatomic differences. It is interesting to note not only patterns of conditions, but patterns of concurrent conditions or anomalies such as those occurring with isolated Müllerian anomalies, in conjunction with disorders of sexual differentiation or with cloacal malformations. This review will address typical presentation of these conditions, highlights of management and point to areas of research need, including clinical outcomes and genetic implications.

Key words

sexual differentiation - Müllerian anomalies - androgen
 

  • References

  • 1 Breech LL, Laufer MR. Mullerian Anomalies. Obstet Gynecol Clinics N Am 2009; 36: 47-68
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Sanfilippo J, Muram D, Lee PA. (eds) Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology. 2nd Edition Elsevier; Amsterdam: Chapter 1 2001
  • 3 Fleming SE, Hall R, Gysler M, McLorie GA. Imperforate anus in females: frequency of genital tract involvement, incidence of associated anomalies and functional outcome. J Pediatr Surg 1986; 21: 146-150
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Levitt MA, Stein R, Pena A. Gynecologic concerns in the treatment of teenagers with cloaca. J Ped Surg 1998; 33: 188-193
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Rich MA, Brock WA, Pena A. Spectrum of genitourinary malformations with imperforate anus. Pediatr Surg Int 1988; 3: 110-113
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Moore KL, Pershaud TVN, Shiota K. Clinical Atlas of Embryology. Amsterdam: Elsevier Health Sciences; 1994
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Simpson JL. Genetics of the female reproductive tracts. Amer J Med Genetics (Semin Med Genet) 1999; 89: 224-239
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Christopoulos P, Fotopoulou G, Gazouli M, Creatsas G. Genetic basis for the development of Mullerian abnormalities: a review of current evidence. Eur J Obstet Gynecol 2010; 5: 7-12
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Buttram Jr VC, Gibbons WE. Mullerian anomalies: a proposed classification (an analysis of 144 cases). Fertil Steril 1979; 32: 40-46
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Nik-Zainal S, Strick R, Storer M, Huang N, Rad R, Willatt L, Fitzgerald T, Martin V, Sandford R, Carter NP, Janecke AR, Renner SP, Oppelt PG, Oppelt P, Schulze C, Brucker S, Hurles M, Beckmann MW, Strissel PL, Shaw-Smith C. High incidence of recurrent copy number variants in patients with isolated and syndromic Müllerian aplasia. J Med Genet 2011; 48: 197-204
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Cheroki C, Krepischi-Santos AC, Szuhai K, Brenner V, Kim CA, Otto PA, Rosenberg C. Genomic imbalances associated with mullerian aplasia. J Med Genet 2008; 45: 228-232
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Philibert P, Biason-Lauber A, Rouzier R, Pienkowski C, Paris F, Konrad D, Schoenle E, Sultan C. Identification and functional analysis of a new WNT4 gene mutation among 28 adolescent girls with primary amenorrhea and Mullerian duct abnormalities: a French collaborative study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2008; 93: 895-900
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ledig S, Schippert C, Strick R, Beckmann MW, Oppelt PG, Wieacker P. Recurrent aberrations identified by array-CGH in patients with Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome. Fertil Steril 2011; 95: 1589-1594
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Allen L. Disorders of sexual development. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am 2009; 36: 25-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 McLaughlin DT, Donahoe PK. Sex determination and differentiation. New Engl J Med 2004; 350: 367-376
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Lee PA, Houk CP, Ahmed SF, Hughes IA. Consensus statement on management of intersex disorders. Ped 2006; 118: e488-e500
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Tekgul S, Riedmiller H, Gerharz E, Hoebeke P, Kocvara R, Nijman R, Radmayr C, Stein R. Disorders of Sex Development. Guidelines on Pediatric Urology Update 2008; 62-67
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Levitt MA, Patel M, Rodriguez G, Gaylin DS, Pena A. The tethered cord in patients with anorectal malformations. J Pediatr Surg 1997; 32: 462-468
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Falcone RA, Levitt MA, Pena A, Bates M. Increased heritability of certain types of anorectal malformations. J Pediatr Surg 2007; 42: 124-128
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Douglas G, Axelrad ME, Brandt ML, Crabtree E, Dietrich JE, French S, Gunn S, Karaviti L, Lopez ME, Macias CG, McCullough LB, Suresh D, Sutton VR. Consensus guidelines for evaluation of DSD by the Texas Children’s Hospital Multidisciplinary Gender Medicine team. Int J Pediatr Endocrinol 2010; e1-e17
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Pena A. Anorectal malformations. Sem in Pediatr Surg 1995; 4: 35-47
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Junqueira BL, Allen LM, Spitzer RF, Lucco KL, Babyn PS, Doria AS. Mullerian Duct anomalies and mimics in children and adolescents: correlative intraoperative assessment with clinical imaging. Radiographics 2009; 29: 1085-1103
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Salim R, Jurkovic D. Assessing Congenital Uterine Anomalies: the Role of Three-dimensional Ultrasonography. Best Practice Res Clin Obstet Gynec 2004; 18: 29-36
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Marcal L, Nothaft MA, Coelho F, Volpato R, Iyer R. Mullerian duct anomalies: MR imaging. Abdom Imaging 2011; 36: 756-764
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Santos XM, Krishnamurthy R, Bercaw-Pratt J, Dietrich JE. The utility of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging versus surgery for the characterization of Mullerian anomalies in the pediatric and adolescent population. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol 2012; 25: 181-184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Miller RJ, Breech LL. Surgical correction of vaginal anomalies. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2008; 51: 223-236
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Burgu B, Duff PG, Cuckow P, Ransley P, Wilcox DT. Long term outcome of vaginal reconstruction: comparing techniques and timing. J Pediatr Urol 2007; 3: 316-320
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Legino L, Penney LL. Uterus didelphys with obstructed hemivagina and pyocolpos, ipsilateral tubal occlusion and renal agenesis and bilateral cervical hypoplasia. A case report. J Reprod Med 1989; 34: 237-240
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Nigam A, Raghunandan C, Yadav R, Tomer S, Anand R. OHVIRA syndrome: rare cause of chronic vaginal discharge in an unmarried female. Congenit Anom 2011; 51: 153-155
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 McQuillan SK, Grover SR. Systematic review of sexual function and satisfaction following the management of vaginal agenesis. Int Urogynecol J 2014; 25: 1313-1320
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Routh JC, Laufer MR, Cannon Jr GM, Diamond DA, Gargollo PC. Management strategies for Mayer Rokitansky Kuster Hauser related vaginal agenesis: a cost effectiveness analysis. J Urol 2010; 184: 2116-2121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 ACOG Committee Opinion No 562 . Mullerian Agenesis: Diagnosis, Management and Treatment. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 121: 1134-1137
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Gargollo PC, Cannon Jr GM, Diamond DA, Thomas P, Burke V, Laufer MR. Should Progressive Perineal Dilation be Considered First Line Therapy for Vaginal Agenesis?. J Urol 2009; 182: 1882-1889
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Edmonds DK, Rose GL, Lipton MG, Quek J. Mayer-Rokitansky-Kuster-Hauser Syndrome: a Review of 245 Consecutive Cases Managed by a Multidisciplinary Approach with Vaginal Dilators. Fertil Steril 2012; 97: 686-690
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Brucker SY, Rall K, Campo R, Oppelt P, Issacson K. Treatment of Congenital Malformations. Semin Reprod Med 2011; 29: 101-112
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Brucker SY, Gergusch M, Zubke W, Rall K, Gauwerky JF, Wallwiener D. Neovagina Creation in Vaginal Agenesis: Development of a New Laparoscopic Vecchietti-based Procedure and Optimized Instruments in a Prospective Comparative Interventional Study in 101 Patients. Fertil Steril 2008; 90: 1940-1952
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Goldwyn R. History of Attempts to Form a Vagina. Plast Reconstr Surg 1977; 59: 319-329
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Chakrabarty S, Mukhopadhyay P, Mukherjee G. Sheares’ Method of Vaginoplasty – Our Experience. J Cutan Aesthet Surg 2011; 4: 118-121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Schatz T, Huber J, Wenzl R. Creation of a Neovagina According to Wharton-Scheares-George in Patients with Mayer-Rokitansky-Huster-Hauser Syndrome. Fertil Steril 2005; 83: 437-441
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Fedele L, Frontino G, Restelli E, Ciappina N, Molta F, Bianchi S. Creation of a Neovagina by Davydov’s Laparoscopic Modified Technique in Patients with Rokitansky Syndrome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010; 202: 33.e1-33.e6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Frank RT. The Formation of an Artificial Vagina without Operation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1938; 35: 1053-1055
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Nakhal RS, Hall-Craggs M, Freeman A, Kirkhan A, Conway GS, Arora R, Woodehouse CRJ, Wood DA, Creighton SM. Evaluation of Retained Testes in Adolescent Girls and Women with Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. Radiology 2013; 268: 153-160
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Smith SR In: Clinical Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology. Sanfilippo J, Lara-Torre E, Edmonds K, Templeman C. (eds.) 2009: 335-344
    Google Scholar
  • 44 Dietrich JE, Hertweck SP, Bond S. Undescended ovaries: a clinical review. JPAG 2007; 20: 57-60
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Marsh CA, Will MA, Smorgick N, Quint EH, Hussain H, Smith YR. Uterine Remnants and Pelvic Pain in Females with Mayer-Rokitansky-Kuster-Hauser Syndrome. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol 2013; 26: 199-202
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Chan YY, Jayaprakasan K, Tan A, Thornton JC, Coomarasamy A, Raine-Fenning NJ. Reproductive Outcomes in Women with Congenital Uterine Anomalies: A Systematic Review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 38: 371-382
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Raga F, Bauset C, Remohi J, Bonilla-Musoles F, Simón C, Pellicer A. Reproductive Impact of Congenital Mullerian Anomalies. Hum Reprod 1997; 12: 2277-2281
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Haddad B, Louis-Sylvestre C, Poitout P, Paniel BJ. Longitudinal Vaginal Septum: a Retrospective Study of 202 Cases. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 74: 197-199
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Patton PE, Novy MJ, Lee DM, Hickok LR. The Diagnosis and Reproductive Outcome after Surgical Treatment of the Complete Septate Uterus, Duplicated Cervix and Vaginal Septum. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 190: 1669-1675
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Quint EH, McCarthy JD, Smith YR. Vaginal Surgery for Congenital Anomalies. Clin Obst Gynec 2010; 53: 115-124
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Deeb A, Hughes IA. Inguinal hernia in female infants: a cue to check the sex chromosomes. BJU Int 2005; 96: 401-403
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Oakes MB, Ewazzadeh AD, Quint E, Smith YR. Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome – A Review. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol 2008; 21: 305-310
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Deans R, Creighton SM, Liao LM, Conway GS. Timing of Gonadectomy in Adult Women with Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (CAIS): Patient Preferences and Clinical Evidence. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 2012; 76: 894-898
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Nakhal RS, Creighton SM. Management of Vaginal Agenesis. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol 2012; 25: 352-357
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Basham E, Stock L, Lewicky-Gaupp C, Mitchell C, Gossett DR. Subsequent pregnancy outcomes after obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS). Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 2013; 19: 328-332
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Krone N, Watcher I, Stefanidou M, Roscher AA, Schwarz HP. Mothers with congenital adrenal hyperplasia and their children: outcome of pregnancy, birth and childhood. Clin Endocrinol 2001; 55: 523-529
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Axelrad ME, Berg JS, Coker LA, Dietrich J, Adcock L, French SL, Gunn S, Ligon BL, McCullough LB, Sutton VR, Karaviti LP. The gender medicine team: “it takes a village”. Adv Pediatr 2009; 56: 145-164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Douglas G, Axelrad ME, Brandt ML, Crabtree E, Dietrich JE, French S, Gunn S, Karaviti L, Lopez ME, Macias CG, McCullough LB, Suresh D, Austin D, Sutton VR. Guidelines for evaluating and managing children born with disorders of sexual development. Ped Annals 2012; 41: e1-e7
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Santos XM, Bravo J, Wang X, Van den Veyver IB, Dietrich JE. Array-based DNA copy number analysis for Mullerian anomalies. ASRM Oral Abstract Presentation 10/2012
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Ledig S, Brucker S, Barresi G, Schomburg J, Rall K, Wieacker P. Frame shift mutation of LHX1 is associated with Mayer-Rokitansky-Kuster-Hauser (MRKH) syndrome. Hum Reprod 2012; 27: 2872-2875
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar