ReviewFrontiers in surgery2026
Modern hysteroscopic management of congenital uterine anomalies: current techniques, emerging technologies, and future directions.
Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Congenital uterine anomalies are clinically relevant in reproductive medicine, particularly among women with infertility, recurrent pregnancy loss, adverse obstetric outcomes, or obstructive symptoms. Hysteroscopy has transformed the management of correctable intracavitary anomalies by enabling conservative, image-guided reconstruction of the uterine cavity while avoiding the morbidity of historical abdominal metroplasty. Scope: This narrative review critically examines contemporary hysteroscopic management of septate uterus, dysmorphic uterus, bicorporeal septate uterus and rare obstructive malformations, such as Robert's uterus. We discuss the implications of the ESHRE/ESGE, CUME, and ASRM classification systems; the role of three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in preoperative mapping; and the technical principles that guide metroplasty, cavity remodeling, ultrasound-guided hysteroscopy, office-based metroplasty, and staged approaches in complex anatomy. Discussion: Bipolar saline-based platforms, miniaturized resectoscopes, bipolar needle electrodes, cold scissors, and selected tissue removal systems have expanded the therapeutic spectrum and improved safety. The evidence supporting surgery remains heterogeneous: the TRUST randomized trial challenged routine septum resection in unselected women, whereas data for T-shaped and other dysmorphic uteri remain largely observational. Emerging technologies, including laser platforms, artificial intelligence-assisted hysteroscopy, and robotic concepts, are promising, but currently lack prospective validation. Conclusion: Optimal management should therefore be individualized, anatomy-driven, and grounded in shared decision-making, with careful preservation of endometrium and myometrium. Standardized reporting, multicenter registries, and prospective comparative studies are needed to define which patients benefit most from hysteroscopic correction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.