Comparative analysis of clinical diagnosis application of two intrauterine adhesion scoring criteria
10.3760/cma.j.cn112141-20221207-00743
- VernacularTitle:CSGE与AFS宫腔粘连评分标准临床应用比较研究
- Author:
Yanzhen PENG
1
;
Sha WANG
;
Lu GAN
;
Yusheng LIU
;
Hua DUAN
Author Information
1. 首都医科大学附属北京妇产医院 北京妇幼保健院妇科微创中心，北京 100006
- Keywords:
Hysteroscopy;
Severity of illness index;
Comparative study;
Forecasting;
Intrauterine adhesion
- From:
Chinese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
2023;58(3):185-190
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To explore the similarities and differences of China Society of Gynecology Endoscopy (CSGE) and American Fertility Society (AFS) intrauterine adhesion (IUA) scoring criteria on IUA grading and their predictive value of reproductive prognosis.Methods:From January 2016 to January 2019, a total of 1 249 patients were diagnosed with IUA by hysteroscopy at Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital. Totally, 378 patients with complete clinical data were enrolled, and the results diagnosed by CSGT and AFS scoring criteria were compared and analyzed.And follow-up for 2 years, the pregnancy rate and live birth rate were statistical analysis.Results:(1) The grade of IUA according to AFS and CSGE scoring criteria was less consistent ( κ=0.295, P<0.001). Compared with AFS, the proportion of severe IUA cases diagnosed by CSGE was significantly lower [45.8% (173/378) vs 15.1% (57/378); RR=0.22, 95% CI: 0.15-0.30, P<0.01); the proportions of both mild and moderate IUA cases were significantly higher ( RR=4.16, 95% CI: 2.38-7.14; RR=2.38, 95% CI: 1.75-3.23; both P<0.01). (2) The pregnancy rates of mild, moderate and severe IUA diagnosed according to CSGE were 11/13, 64.5% (147/228), 31.8% (7/22), live birth rates were 11/13, 54.8% (125/228) and 22.7% (5/22), respectively; there were statistically significant differences between the groups (all P<0.01). The pregnancy rates of mild, moderate and severe IUA diagnosed based on AFS were 3/3, 66.9% (97/145) and 56.5% (65/115), respectively, with no statistically significant difference between the groups ( P>0.05). (3) IUA grades based on both CSGE and AFS criteria were significantly negatively correlated with pregnancy rates and live birth rates (CSGE: r=-0.210, r=-0.226; AFS: r=-0.130, r=-0.147; all P<0.05). Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that CSGE had higher OR for both pregnancy rates and live birth rates compared to AFS (3.889 vs 1.657, 3.983 vs 1.554, respectrvely). Conclusions:Compared with AFS, the IUA grade based on CSGE is better related with reproductive prognosis, suggesting that the CSGE standard might be more objective and comprehensive and has better predictive value for reproductive prognosis, thus avoiding overdiagnosis and overtreatment.
