<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" "journalpublishing.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="2.3" xml:lang="EN" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Front. Physiol.</journal-id>
<journal-title>Frontiers in Physiology</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="pubmed">Front. Physiol.</abbrev-journal-title>
<issn pub-type="epub">1664-042X</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>Frontiers Media S.A.</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">1645131</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fphys.2025.1645131</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
<subject>Physiology</subject>
<subj-group>
<subject>Original Research</subject>
</subj-group>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>Ultrasound characteristics of endometrial receptivity in patients with intrauterine adhesion following endometrial polyp surgery and their impact on pregnancy</article-title>
<alt-title alt-title-type="left-running-head">Shen and Yan</alt-title>
<alt-title alt-title-type="right-running-head">
<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2025.1645131">10.3389/fphys.2025.1645131</ext-link>
</alt-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Shen</surname>
<given-names>Wenying</given-names>
</name>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/conceptualization/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/validation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/Writing - review &#x26; editing/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/data-curation/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
<name>
<surname>Yan</surname>
<given-names>Lanxiang</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="corresp" rid="c001">&#x2a;</xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/3097018/overview"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/validation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/Writing - review &#x26; editing/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-original-draft/"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff>
<institution>Department of Ultrasound</institution>, <institution>Shiyan People&#x2019;s Hospital</institution>, <addr-line>Shenzhen</addr-line>, <addr-line>Guangdong</addr-line>, <country>China</country>
</aff>
<author-notes>
<fn fn-type="edited-by">
<p>
<bold>Edited by:</bold> <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1260336/overview">Elisabeth Pinart</ext-link>, University of Girona, Spain</p>
</fn>
<fn fn-type="edited-by">
<p>
<bold>Reviewed by:</bold> <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/2036123/overview">Xiushan Feng</ext-link>, Fujian Medical University, China</p>
<p>
<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/2232095/overview">Jadranka Georgievska</ext-link>, University Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics Skopje, North Macedonia</p>
</fn>
<corresp id="c001">&#x2a;Correspondence: Lanxiang Yan, <email>YanLanxiang2078@163.com</email>
</corresp>
</author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>08</day>
<month>08</month>
<year>2025</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="collection">
<year>2025</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>16</volume>
<elocation-id>1645131</elocation-id>
<history>
<date date-type="received">
<day>11</day>
<month>06</month>
<year>2025</year>
</date>
<date date-type="accepted">
<day>21</day>
<month>07</month>
<year>2025</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>Copyright &#xa9; 2025 Shen and Yan.</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2025</copyright-year>
<copyright-holder>Shen and Yan</copyright-holder>
<license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">
<p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.</p>
</license>
</permissions>
<abstract>
<sec>
<title>Objective</title>
<p>This study endeavors to investigate the ultrasound characteristics of endometrial receptivity (ER) in patients with intrauterine adhesion (IUA) following endometrial polyp surgery and their impact on pregnancy.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Methods</title>
<p>Sixty patients with IUA following endometrial polyp surgery were selected as the observation group. Another 60 healthy women undergoing physical examinations during the same period were selected as the control group. Transvaginal three-dimensional ultrasound was used to assess ER parameters, including endometrial thickness (ET), pulsatility index (PI), resistance index (RI), endometrial volume (EV), vascularization index (VI), flow index (FI), and vascularization-flow index (VFI). Patients in the observation group underwent hysteroscopic adhesiolysis and were categorized into mild, moderate, and severe adhesion subgroups based on intraoperative findings. Ultrasound parameters were compared among subgroups. After a 2-year follow-up, patients were further divided into pregnant and non-pregnant groups according to outcomes, and their ultrasound parameters were compared. Multivariate Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors influencing pregnancy outcomes. ROC curve analysis was used to evaluate the predictive value of ultrasound parameters for pregnancy outcomes.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Results</title>
<p>The observation group had a thinner ET, smaller EV, VI, FI, and VFI, and higher PI and RI in contrast to the control group (<italic>P</italic> &#x3c; 0.05). ET was thinner, EV, VI, FI, and VFI were lower, while RI and PI were higher in the moderate and severe adhesion groups compared to the mild group. These differences were more pronounced in the severe group than in the moderate group (<italic>P</italic> &#x3c; 0.05). The non-pregnant group had a thinner ET, smaller EV, VI, FI, VFI, PI, and RI compared to the pregnant group (<italic>P</italic> &#x3c; 0.05). Multivariate Logistic regression analysis revealed that ET, EV, PI, VI, and FI were influential factors affecting pregnancy outcomes in the observation group. ROC curve analysis demonstrated that the AUC for predicting pregnancy in the observation group were 0.796 for ET, 0.736 for EV, 0.760 for PI, 0.752 for VI, 0.652 for FI, and 0.958 for their combined assessment (<italic>P</italic> &#x3c; 0.05).</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Conclusion</title>
<p>ER ultrasound parameters have high evaluative value in assessing patients with IUA following endometrial polyp surgery and can effectively predict pregnancy outcomes.</p>
</sec>
</abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd>endometrial receptivity</kwd>
<kwd>endometrial polyp</kwd>
<kwd>intrauterine adhesion</kwd>
<kwd>ultrasound parameters</kwd>
<kwd>pregnancy outcome</kwd>
</kwd-group>
<custom-meta-wrap>
<custom-meta>
<meta-name>section-at-acceptance</meta-name>
<meta-value>Reproductive and Mating Physiology</meta-value>
</custom-meta>
</custom-meta-wrap>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec id="s1">
<title>Introduction</title>
<p>Intrauterine adhesion (IUA), a prevalent gynecological condition, has emerged as the primary etiology of uterine-related infertility, particularly in the context of rising rates of intrauterine surgical procedures (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Lin et al., 2023</xref>). IUA arises due to trauma inflicted upon the endometrial tissue (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Parashar et al., 2023</xref>), frequently associated with severe clinical manifestations that significantly compromise reproductive function, including menstrual irregularities, infertility, or recurrent pregnancy loss (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Lee et al., 2021</xref>). Various therapeutic strategies have been investigated to mitigate its pathological characteristics, including transcervical resection of adhesions, intrauterine contraceptive devices, anti-adhesive barriers, and periodic hormonal therapies (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Lin et al., 2023</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Ai et al., 2020</xref>), with the advent of hysteroscopy facilitates the evolution of more sophisticated techniques for adhesiolysis under direct endoscopic visualization (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Koythong and Guan, 2020</xref>).</p>
<p>Since its relation to infertility, IUA may have a impact on reproductive ability for women. Infertility stands as a pervasive and challenging global medical issue. It not only severely undermines the quality of life for couples and family wellbeing but also has implications for a nation&#x2019;s medical standards and reproductive health (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Priskorn et al., 2021</xref>). Key pregnancy-outcome factors include embryo quality, endometrial receptivity (ER), and embryo-endometrium sync. ER is crucial, referring to the endometrial state enabling blastocyst adhesion, invasion, and implantation for successful implantation (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Zajicek et al., 2022</xref>). In detail, the endometrium, which encompasses the superior inner cortex as well as the mucosa, plays a pivotal role in fertility and the maintenance of reproductive health. In clinical practice, the assessment of endometrial thickness (ET) holds significant importance for the diagnosis of disorders associated with the endometrium (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Mariani et al., 2021</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Long et al., 2020</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Wang et al., 2022</xref>). ET is frequently utilized as an indicator to assess ER. When the endometrium is excessively thin, it creates an unfavorable environment for embryonic implantation and subsequent development (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Wang et al., 2022</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Zhao et al., 2014</xref>). Endometrial pathological biopsy is conventionally regarded as the gold-standard method for assessing ER. However, its clinical utility is constrained due to its invasive nature. In contrast, ultrasound is more extensively utilized for ER evaluation (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Costello et al., 2019</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Ni et al., 2019</xref>). Up until now, three-dimensional ultrasound has gained extensive application in clinical medicine. It is capable of generating a continuous series of anatomical images, which are highly valuable for diagnostic purposes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Wang et al., 2022</xref>).</p>
<p>Given that existing research predominantly focuses on therapeutic strategies for IUA, there remains a critical gap in studies specifically investigating the ultrasound characteristics of ER in patients with IUA treated by transvaginal three-dimensional ultrasound following endometrial polyp surgery. This study systematically analyzes variations in ER parameters using three-dimensional ultrasound and their correlation with pregnancy outcomes, aiming to provide objective imaging evidence for optimizing postoperative fertility management in clinical practice.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="materials|methods" id="s2">
<title>Materials and methods</title>
<sec sec-type="ethics-statement" id="s2-1">
<title>Ethics statement</title>
<p>Ethical approval for the study was granted by the ethics committee of Shiyan People&#x2019;s Hospital, Bao&#x2019;an District, and informed consent was obtained from all participants.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2-2">
<title>Study population</title>
<p>Sixty patients with IUA following endometrial polyp surgery admitted to Shiyan People&#x2019;s Hospital, Bao&#x2019;an District, from August 2022 to March 2023 were selected as the observation group. Another 60 healthy women (with no history of adverse pregnancy outcomes and regular menstrual cycles) who underwent physical examinations at Shiyan People&#x2019;s Hospital, Bao&#x2019;an District, during the same period were selected as the control group.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2-3">
<title>Inclusion criteria</title>
<p>Patients who had undergone hysteroscopic resection of endometrial polyps and were subsequently diagnosed with IUA upon follow-up hysteroscopy&#x2014;characterized by central adhesions with widened anterior-posterior wall fusion, partial obstruction of the uterine horns, or asymmetrical uterine cavity contours, and in some cases, small cystic cavities due to mixed adhesions. Additional criteria included a clear desire for future fertility, regular menstrual cycles, confirmed normal follicular development and ovulation, willingness to comply with follow-up protocols, no recurrence of adhesions during the follow-up period, and availability of complete clinical data.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2-4">
<title>Exclusion criteria</title>
<p>Patients were excluded if they had other intrauterine pathologies (e.g., uterine fibroids), a surgical history involving the uterus or ovaries, comorbid endocrine disorders such as hyperthyroidism or polycystic ovary syndrome, congenital uterine malformations, tubal diseases, major organ dysfunction (heart, liver, or kidneys), or were diagnosed with malignant tumors.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2-5">
<title>Classification of IUA severity</title>
<p>The severity of IUA was assessed via hysteroscopic examination based on the March classification criteria (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">March et al., 1978</xref>). Mild IUA was defined as involvement of less than one-fourth of the uterine cavity, with thin or filmy adhesions and clearly visible tubal ostia and upper uterine cavity. Moderate IUA involved one-fourth to three-fourths of the cavity, characterized by the presence of adhesions without uterine wall fusion, and partial occlusion of the tubal ostia and upper cavity. Severe IUA was defined as involvement of more than three-fourths of the uterine cavity, with thick adhesions or fusion of the uterine walls, and complete occlusion of the tubal ostia and upper cavity. According to these criteria, the 60 patients in the observation group were categorized into mild, moderate, and severe adhesion subgroups.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2-6">
<title>Ultrasound examination method</title>
<p>Both groups underwent examinations on the day of ovulation using a Voluson E10 transvaginal three-dimensional ultrasound system (GE Healthcare, United States). A 3D intracavitary volume probe with a frequency of 5.0&#x2013;7.5 MHz was used. Prior to the scan, participants emptied their bladders and were positioned in the lithotomy posture. After disinfection, coupling gel was applied to the probe, which was then gently inserted into the posterior vaginal fornix. Multiplanar scanning (sagittal, coronal, and transverse) of the pelvis was performed to assess the uterus, adnexa, and endometrium. ET was measured in the longitudinal plane of the uterus by identifying the maximum distance between the anterior and posterior endometrial-myometrial junctions, perpendicular to the midline of the uterine cavity. ET was measured three times, and the average was calculated. Using Doppler imaging, uterine arteries were identified at the level of the internal cervical os on each side. Once three consistent waveforms were recorded, pulsatility index (PI) and resistance index (RI) were measured, and bilateral averages were used for analysis. The 3D mode was activated to acquire volumetric and reconstructed data. The endometrial contour was outlined, and the endometrial volume (EV), vascularization index (VI), flow index (FI), and vascularization-flow index (VFI) were calculated. Image analysis was performed using VOCAL software, with each parameter measured three times and averaged. All examinations were conducted by ultrasound physicians with over 10 years of clinical experience who had undergone standardized training.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2-7">
<title>Observation indicators</title>
<p>
<list list-type="simple">
<list-item>
<p>(1) Ultrasound parameters: ET, EV, PI, RI, VI, FI, and VFI were compared between the control and observation groups.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item>
<p>(2) Ultrasound parameters among patients with different degrees of IUA severity were compared.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item>
<p>(3) Patients in the observation group were followed up for 2 years after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis, with outpatient or telephone follow-up conducted every 3 months during the follow-up period. Based on pregnancy status during follow-up, patients were divided into pregnant and non-pregnant groups, and their ultrasound parameters were compared.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item>
<p>(4) ROC curves were plotted to analyze the clinical value of ultrasound parameters in predicting pregnancy in patients with IUA following endometrial polyp surgery, both individually and in combination.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item>
<p>(5) Multivariate Logistic regression analysis was implemented to identify factors influencing pregnancy outcomes in patients with IUA following endometrial polyp surgery.</p>
</list-item>
</list>
</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2-8">
<title>Statistical methods</title>
<p>All data were processed using SPSS 25.0 software (IBM SPSS Statistics, Chicago, IL, United States). Categorical data were expressed as cases and percentages (%), with comparisons between groups using the chi-square test. Measurement data were tested for normality using the Shapiro-Wilk method. Normally distributed measurement data were expressed as means &#xb1; standard deviations, with comparisons between groups using the independent samples <italic>t</italic>-test; while comparisons among multiple groups were performed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by LSD <italic>post hoc</italic> tests. ROC curves were plotted to analyze the predictive value of ER ultrasound parameters for pregnancy. Multivariate Logistic regression analysis was executed to identify factors influencing pregnancy. A <italic>P</italic>-value &#x3c;0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="results" id="s3">
<title>Results</title>
<sec id="s3-1">
<title>General information</title>
<p>There were no noticeable differences in age, body mass index, educational level, or age at menarche between the control and observation groups (<italic>P</italic> &#x3e; 0.05; <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table 1</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap id="T1" position="float">
<label>TABLE 1</label>
<caption>
<p>Comparison of general information between the control group and the observation group.</p>
</caption>
<table>
<thead valign="top">
<tr>
<th align="center">Items</th>
<th align="center">Control group (<italic>n</italic> &#x3d; 60)</th>
<th align="center">Observation group (<italic>n</italic> &#x3d; 60)</th>
<th align="center">
<italic>&#x3c7;</italic>
<sup>
<italic>2</italic>
</sup>/<italic>t</italic>
</th>
<th align="center">
<italic>P</italic>
</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody valign="top">
<tr>
<td align="center">Age (years)</td>
<td align="center">32.68 &#xb1; 3.72</td>
<td align="center">33.93 &#xb1; 3.86</td>
<td rowspan="2" align="center">&#x2212;1.807</td>
<td rowspan="2" align="center">0.073</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">BMI (kg/m<sup>2)</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">22.58 &#xb1; 1.32</td>
<td align="center">22.49 &#xb1; 1.28</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Educational level</td>
<td align="left"/>
<td align="left"/>
<td align="left">0.378</td>
<td align="left">0.706</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">&#x2003;High school and below</td>
<td align="center">18 (30.00)</td>
<td align="center">20 (33.33)</td>
<td/>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">&#x2003;College degree and above</td>
<td align="center">42 (70.00)</td>
<td align="center">40 (66.67)</td>
<td/>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">&#x2003;Age at menarche (years)</td>
<td align="center">14.20 &#xb1; 2.37</td>
<td align="center">13.85 &#xb1; 2.07</td>
<td align="center">0.860</td>
<td align="center">0.390</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-2">
<title>Ultrasound parameters among patients with varying severity of IUA</title>
<p>Compared with the mild group, both the moderate and severe adhesion groups showed reduced ET, EV, VI, FI, and VFI, along with elevated PI and RI. These trends were more pronounced in the severe group than in the moderate group (<italic>P</italic> &#x3c; 0.05; <xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table 2</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap id="T2" position="float">
<label>TABLE 2</label>
<caption>
<p>Ultrasound parameters among patients with varying severity of IUA.</p>
</caption>
<table>
<thead valign="top">
<tr>
<th align="center">Index</th>
<th align="center">Mild adhesion group (<italic>n</italic> &#x3d; 21)</th>
<th align="center">Moderate adhesion group (<italic>n</italic> &#x3d; 26)</th>
<th align="center">Severe adhesion group (<italic>n</italic> &#x3d; 13)</th>
<th align="center">F</th>
<th align="center">
<italic>P</italic>
</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody valign="top">
<tr>
<td align="center">ET (mm)</td>
<td align="center">5.31 &#xb1; 0.93</td>
<td align="center">4.55 &#xb1; 0.75</td>
<td align="center">3.70 &#xb1; 0.78<sup>ab</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">15.590</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">EV (cm<sup>3</sup>)</td>
<td align="center">3.14 &#xb1; 1.08</td>
<td align="center">2.26 &#xb1; 0.84<sup>b</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">1.50 &#xb1; 0.77<sup>ab</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">13.369</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">PI</td>
<td align="center">2.59 &#xb1; 0.44</td>
<td align="center">3.00 &#xb1; 0.47<sup>b</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">3.51 &#xb1; 0.65<sup>ab</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">13.514</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">RI</td>
<td align="center">0.75 &#xb1; 0.08</td>
<td align="center">0.83 &#xb1; &#xb1;0.08<sup>b</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">0.91 &#xb1; 0.09<sup>ab</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">15.352</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">VI</td>
<td align="center">3.36 &#xb1; 0.63</td>
<td align="center">2.87 &#xb1; 0.51<sup>b</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">2.31 &#xb1; 0.56<sup>ab</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">14.148</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">FI</td>
<td align="center">24.75 &#xb1; 4.31</td>
<td align="center">21.16 &#xb1; 3.51<sup>b</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">17.29 &#xb1; 4.01<sup>ab</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">14.819</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">VFI</td>
<td align="center">0.69 &#xb1; 0.15</td>
<td align="center">0.51 &#xb1; 0.14<sup>b</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">0.42 &#xb1; 0.07<sup>ab</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">22.721</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<fn>
<p>Note: <sup>a</sup>
<italic>P</italic> &#x3c; 0.05 vs. moderate adhesion group; <sup>b</sup>
<italic>P</italic> &#x3c; 0.05 vs. mild adhesion group.</p>
</fn>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-3">
<title>Ultrasound parameters between the observation and control groups</title>
<p>The observation group had a thinner ET, smaller EV, VI, FI, and VFI, and higher PI and RI in contrast to the control group (<italic>P</italic> &#x3c; 0.05; <xref ref-type="table" rid="T3">Table 3</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap id="T3" position="float">
<label>TABLE 3</label>
<caption>
<p>Comparison of ultrasound parameters between the control group and the observation group.</p>
</caption>
<table>
<thead valign="top">
<tr>
<th align="center">Index</th>
<th align="center">Control group (<italic>n</italic> &#x3d; 60)</th>
<th align="center">Observation group (<italic>n</italic> &#x3d; 60)</th>
<th align="center">
<italic>t</italic>
</th>
<th align="center">
<italic>P</italic>
</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody valign="top">
<tr>
<td align="center">ET (mm)</td>
<td align="center">8.78 &#xb1; 1.56</td>
<td align="center">4.63 &#xb1; 1.00</td>
<td align="center">17.338</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">EV (cm<sup>3</sup>)</td>
<td align="center">4.99 &#xb1; 2.34</td>
<td align="center">2.40 &#xb1; 1.10</td>
<td align="center">7.742</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">PI</td>
<td align="center">2.46 &#xb1; 0.52</td>
<td align="center">2.97 &#xb1; 0.60</td>
<td align="center">&#x2212;4.948</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">RI</td>
<td align="center">0.78 &#xb1; 0.04</td>
<td align="center">0.82 &#xb1; 0.10</td>
<td align="center">&#x2212;2.471</td>
<td align="center">0.015</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">VI</td>
<td align="center">4.35 &#xb1; 1.67</td>
<td align="center">2.92 &#xb1; 0.68</td>
<td align="center">6.146</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">FI</td>
<td align="center">27.80 &#xb1; 6.15</td>
<td align="center">21.58 &#xb1; 4.75</td>
<td align="center">6.202</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">VFI</td>
<td align="center">1.34 &#xb1; 0.53</td>
<td align="center">0.55 &#xb1; 0.17</td>
<td align="center">10.887</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-4">
<title>Ultrasound parameters between the pregnant and non-pregnant groups</title>
<p>After 2 years of follow-up, 24 out of 60 patients with IUA following endometrial polyp surgery successfully conceived, with a pregnancy success rate of 40.00%. The non-pregnant group had a thinner ET, smaller EV, VI, FI, VFI, PI, and RI compared to the pregnant group (<italic>P</italic> &#x3c; 0.05; <xref ref-type="table" rid="T4">Table 4</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap id="T4" position="float">
<label>TABLE 4</label>
<caption>
<p>Comparison of ultrasound parameters between the pregnant group and non-pregnant group in observation group.</p>
</caption>
<table>
<thead valign="top">
<tr>
<th align="center">Index</th>
<th align="center">Non-pregnant group (<italic>n</italic> &#x3d; 36)</th>
<th align="center">Pregnant group (<italic>n</italic> &#x3d; 24)</th>
<th align="center">
<italic>t</italic>
</th>
<th align="center">
<italic>P</italic>
</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody valign="top">
<tr>
<td align="center">ET (mm)</td>
<td align="center">4.23 &#xb1; 0.75</td>
<td align="center">5.23 &#xb1; 1.05</td>
<td align="center">&#x2212;4.305</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">EV (cm<sup>3)</sup>
</td>
<td align="center">2.03 &#xb1; 0.85</td>
<td align="center">2.96 &#xb1; 1.20</td>
<td align="center">&#x2212;3.524</td>
<td align="center">0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">PI</td>
<td align="center">2.76 &#xb1; 0.43</td>
<td align="center">3.28 &#xb1; 0.68</td>
<td align="center">&#x2212;3.686</td>
<td align="center">0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">RI</td>
<td align="center">0.78 &#xb1; 0.08</td>
<td align="center">0.87 &#xb1; 0.11</td>
<td align="center">&#x2212;3.656</td>
<td align="center">0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">VI</td>
<td align="center">2.70 &#xb1; 0.48</td>
<td align="center">3.25 &#xb1; 0.80</td>
<td align="center">&#x2212;3.318</td>
<td align="center">0.002</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">FI</td>
<td align="center">20.36 &#xb1; 4.13</td>
<td align="center">23.41 &#xb1; 5.10</td>
<td align="center">&#x2212;2.550</td>
<td align="center">0.013</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">VFI</td>
<td align="center">0.42 &#xb1; 0.03</td>
<td align="center">0.75 &#xb1; 0.06</td>
<td align="center">&#x2212;28.161</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-5">
<title>Multivariate logistic regression analysis of factors influencing pregnancy</title>
<p>Using whether the patient conceived as the dependent variable (yes &#x3d; 1, no &#x3d; 0) and ET, EV, PI, RI, VI, FI, and VFI as independent variables, Logistic regression analysis identified hat ET, EV, PI, VI, and FI were significant influencing factors for pregnancy outcomes in the observation group (<italic>P</italic> &#x3c; 0.05; <xref ref-type="table" rid="T5">Table 5</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap id="T5" position="float">
<label>TABLE 5</label>
<caption>
<p>Multivariate Logistic regression analysis of influencing factors of pregnancy in the observation group.</p>
</caption>
<table>
<thead valign="top">
<tr>
<th align="center">Variable</th>
<th align="center">&#x3b2;</th>
<th align="center">SE</th>
<th align="center">Wald</th>
<th align="center">
<italic>P</italic>
</th>
<th align="center">OR (95% CI)</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody valign="top">
<tr>
<td align="center">ET (mm)</td>
<td align="center">1.256</td>
<td align="center">0.575</td>
<td align="center">4.765</td>
<td align="center">0.029</td>
<td align="center">3.510 (1.137&#x223c;10.837)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">EV (cm<sup>3</sup>)</td>
<td align="center">1.213</td>
<td align="center">0.514</td>
<td align="center">5.571</td>
<td align="center">0.018</td>
<td align="center">3.365 (1.229&#x223c;9.214)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">PI</td>
<td align="center">1.960</td>
<td align="center">0.880</td>
<td align="center">4.955</td>
<td align="center">0.026</td>
<td align="center">7.098 (1.264&#x223c;39.864)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">VI</td>
<td align="center">1.843</td>
<td align="center">0.652</td>
<td align="center">7.984</td>
<td align="center">0.005</td>
<td align="center">6.315 (1.759&#x223c;22.677)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">FI</td>
<td align="center">0.289</td>
<td align="center">0.118</td>
<td align="center">5.950</td>
<td align="center">0.015</td>
<td align="center">1.335 (1.058&#x223c;1.683)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-6">
<title>Predictive value of ultrasound parameters for pregnancy</title>
<p>ROC curve analysis elucidated that AUC for predicting pregnancy in the observation group were 0.796 for ET, 0.736 for EV, 0.760 for PI, 0.752 for VI, and 0.652 for FI, while the combined assessment of these parameters yielded an AUC of 0.958, indicating the highest predictive value when used in combination (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T6">Table 6</xref>; <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figure 1</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap id="T6" position="float">
<label>TABLE 6</label>
<caption>
<p>Predictive value of ultrasound parameters on pregnancy in the observation group.</p>
</caption>
<table>
<thead valign="top">
<tr>
<th align="center">Variable</th>
<th align="center">AUC</th>
<th align="center">Optimal cutoff</th>
<th align="center">Specificity</th>
<th align="center">Sensitivity</th>
<th align="center">Youden index</th>
<th align="center">95% CI</th>
<th align="center">
<italic>P</italic>
</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody valign="top">
<tr>
<td align="center">ET (mm)</td>
<td align="center">0.796</td>
<td align="center">4.950</td>
<td align="center">0.833</td>
<td align="center">0.750</td>
<td align="center">0.583</td>
<td align="center">0.668&#x223c;0.924</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">EV (cm<sup>3</sup>)</td>
<td align="center">0.736</td>
<td align="center">2.085</td>
<td align="center">0.583</td>
<td align="center">0.792</td>
<td align="center">0.375</td>
<td align="center">0.604&#x223c;0.868</td>
<td align="center">0.002</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">PI</td>
<td align="center">0.760</td>
<td align="center">2.855</td>
<td align="center">0.639</td>
<td align="center">0.833</td>
<td align="center">0.472</td>
<td align="center">0.634&#x223c;0.887</td>
<td align="center">0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">VI</td>
<td align="center">0.752</td>
<td align="center">2.915</td>
<td align="center">0.722</td>
<td align="center">0.750</td>
<td align="center">0.472</td>
<td align="center">0.614&#x223c;0.890</td>
<td align="center">0.001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">FI</td>
<td align="center">0.652</td>
<td align="center">25.950</td>
<td align="center">0.972</td>
<td align="center">0.333</td>
<td align="center">0.305</td>
<td align="center">0.508&#x223c;0.797</td>
<td align="center">0.047</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center">Combination</td>
<td align="center">0.958</td>
<td align="center">&#x2014;</td>
<td align="center">0.833</td>
<td align="center">1.000</td>
<td align="center">0.833</td>
<td align="center">0.915&#x223c;1.000</td>
<td align="center">&#x3c;0.001</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<fig id="F1" position="float">
<label>FIGURE 1</label>
<caption>
<p>ROC curve for predicting pregnancy in the observation group using ultrasound parameters.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-16-1645131-g001.tif">
<alt-text content-type="machine-generated">ROC curve showing sensitivity versus 1-specificity for six curve sources: ET (blue), EV (red), PI (green), VI (orange), FI (yellow), and Combination (cyan). A reference line is shown in pink.</alt-text>
</graphic>
</fig>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="discussion" id="s4">
<title>Discussion</title>
<p>The present study systematically evaluated the ultrasound characteristics of ER in patients with IUA following endometrial polyp surgery and their correlation with subsequent pregnancy outcomes. By comparing ultrasound-derived ER parameters with those of healthy controls and analyzing their association with subsequent pregnancy outcomes, we provide novel insights into the structural and functional alterations in the endometrium caused by IUA and their reproductive consequences.</p>
<p>Our findings indicate that patients with postoperative IUA exhibit significantly decreased ET and EV, along with reduced vascular indices&#x2014;VI, FI, and (VFI&#x2014;and elevated uterine artery impedance parameters&#x2014;PI and RI. Moreover, patients with moderate and severe adhesions showed significantly reduced ET, EV, VI, FI, and VFI compared to those with mild adhesions, while RI and PI were notably increased. These changes were more pronounced in the severe group than in the moderate group, suggesting that increased adhesion severity is associated with poorer endometrial perfusion and receptivity. These findings highlight the utility of ultrasound parameters in stratifying IUA severity and guiding individualized treatment. These alterations reflect a compromised intrauterine environment, consistent with prior studies demonstrating that IUA, characterized by fibrotic adhesions within the uterine cavity, disrupt the endometrial architecture and impede angiogenesis, thereby limiting endometrial receptivity (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Chen et al., 2023</xref>). As adequate vascular supply is a prerequisite for embryo implantation and early placental development, diminished blood perfusion may underlie the observed decline in reproductive potential.</p>
<p>Importantly, when stratified by pregnancy outcome during follow-up, patients in the pregnant subgroup demonstrated significantly more favorable ER parameters than those who failed to conceive. Specifically, they exhibited increased ET, EV, VI, FI, and VFI values, suggesting better-developed and more functional endometrial tissue with superior perfusion capacity. This aligns with previous findings showing that successful implantation is closely associated with higher subendometrial vascularity and volumetric indices (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Peng et al., 2025</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Wu et al., 2022</xref>). Interestingly, PI and RI were also higher in the pregnant group, potentially reflecting adaptive vascular remodeling rather than pathological resistance, highlighting the nuanced role of hemodynamics in implantation physiology.</p>
<p>Multivariate logistic regression further confirmed that ET, EV, PI, VI, and FI are independent predictors of pregnancy outcomes, reinforcing their clinical relevance. Notably, ROC analysis demonstrated that the combination of these parameters yielded superior predictive accuracy (AUC &#x3d; 0.958) compared to any individual marker, supporting a multi-parametric assessment strategy. This finding is consistent with literature emphasizing the comprehensive nature of ER, which cannot be fully captured by a single measurement but instead requires integration of morphologic, hemodynamic, and functional dimensions (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">Craciunas et al., 2019</xref>).</p>
<p>Clinically, our results highlight the practical advantages of three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound as a non-invasive, accessible, and reproducible tool for evaluating ER in patients with a history of endometrial pathology. Unlike invasive biopsy-based assessments, ultrasound allows real-time, cycle-specific monitoring, making it particularly suitable for fertility preservation and treatment planning (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Elsokkary et al., 2019</xref>). In patients recovering from IUA, such dynamic evaluation enables timely identification of those at risk of poor reproductive outcomes, guiding tailored interventions such as hormonal modulation, intrauterine therapy, or assisted reproductive technologies.</p>
<p>This study has several limitations. First, it was conducted at a single center with a relatively limited sample size, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. Second, although we have provided a comparison of ultrasound parameters among IUA patients with different severity grades, the study did not include an inter-observer consistency analysis, which may introduce measurement bias. Third, the follow-up period was relatively short, and longer-term fertility outcomes after hysteroscopic treatment were not fully assessed. Future research should consider multicenter collaboration, larger sample sizes, inter-rater reliability testing, and extended follow-up to validate and expand upon these findings.</p>
<p>In conclusion, this study validates the clinical utility of three-dimensional ultrasound parameters in assessing ER status and predicting pregnancy outcomes in patients with IUA following endometrial polyp surgery. The integrated evaluation of structural, volumetric, and vascular ultrasound metrics provides a robust framework for optimizing reproductive counseling and therapeutic strategies in this challenging patient population. Future research should integrate advanced diagnostic modalities, such as contrast-enhanced ultrasonography or MRI, and explore molecular markers of endometrial receptivity to validate and extend our findings. Additionally, interventional trials leveraging ultrasound ER parameters to guide clinical decision-making could further strengthen causal inference.</p>
</sec>
</body>
<back>
<sec sec-type="data-availability" id="s5">
<title>Data availability statement</title>
<p>The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="ethics-statement" id="s6">
<title>Ethics statement</title>
<p>The studies involving humans were approved by ethics committee of Shiyan People&#x2019;s Hospital, Bao&#x2019;an District (approval number: 2022095). The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="author-contributions" id="s7">
<title>Author contributions</title>
<p>WS: Conceptualization, Validation, Writing &#x2013; review and editing, Data curation. LY: Validation, Writing &#x2013; review and editing, Writing &#x2013; original draft.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="funding-information" id="s8">
<title>Funding</title>
<p>The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article.</p>
</sec>
<ack>
<p>We thank the associate editor and the reviewers for their useful feedback that improved this paper.</p>
</ack>
<sec sec-type="COI-statement" id="s9">
<title>Conflict of interest</title>
<p>The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="ai-statement" id="s10">
<title>Generative AI statement</title>
<p>The author(s) declare that no Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="disclaimer" id="s11">
<title>Publisher&#x2019;s note</title>
<p>All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.</p>
</sec>
<ref-list>
<title>References</title>
<ref id="B1">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Ai</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chen</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Liu</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ren</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Yan</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Feng</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>lncRNA TUG1 promotes endometrial fibrosis and inflammation by sponging miR-590-5p to regulate Fasl in intrauterine adhesions</article-title>. <source>Int. Immunopharmacol.</source> <volume>86</volume>, <fpage>106703</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.intimp.2020.106703</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Chen</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wang</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhao</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhang</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2023</year>). <article-title>Clinical efficacy of hysteroscopic adhesiolysis combined with periodic balloon dilation for intrauterine adhesion in IVF treatment</article-title>. <source>Front. Endocrinol. (Lausanne)</source> <volume>14</volume>, <fpage>1236447</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fendo.2023.1236447</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Costello</surname>
<given-names>M. F.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Misso</surname>
<given-names>M. L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Balen</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Boyle</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Devoto</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Garad</surname>
<given-names>R. M.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Evidence summaries and recommendations from the international evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome: assessment and treatment of infertility</article-title>. <source>Hum. Reprod. Open</source> <volume>2019</volume> (<issue>1</issue>), <fpage>hoy021</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/hropen/hoy021</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Craciunas</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gallos</surname>
<given-names>I.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chu</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bourne</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Quenby</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Brosens</surname>
<given-names>J. J.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Conventional and modern markers of endometrial receptivity: a systematic review and meta-analysis</article-title>. <source>Hum. Reprod. Update</source> <volume>25</volume> (<issue>2</issue>), <fpage>202</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>223</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/humupd/dmy044</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B5">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Elsokkary</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Eldin</surname>
<given-names>A. B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Abdelhafez</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Rateb</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Samy</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Eldorf</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>The reproducibility of the novel utilization of five-dimensional ultrasound and power Doppler in the prediction of endometrial receptivity in intracytoplasmic sperm-injected women: a pilot prospective clinical study</article-title>. <source>Arch. Gynecol. Obstet.</source> <volume>299</volume> (<issue>2</issue>), <fpage>551</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>558</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00404-018-5001-4</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B6">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Koythong</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Guan</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Consideration for an optimal and practical approach to hysteroscopic adhesiolysis of intrauterine adhesions</article-title>. <source>Ann. Transl. Med.</source> <volume>8</volume> (<issue>11</issue>), <fpage>663</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.21037/atm.2020.03.119</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Lee</surname>
<given-names>W. L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Liu</surname>
<given-names>C. H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Cheng</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chang</surname>
<given-names>W. H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Liu</surname>
<given-names>W. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wang</surname>
<given-names>P. H.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Focus on the primary prevention of intrauterine adhesions: current concept and vision</article-title>. <source>Int. J. Mol. Sci.</source> <volume>22</volume> (<issue>10</issue>), <fpage>5175</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/ijms22105175</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B8">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Lin</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Li</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chen</surname>
<given-names>P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhang</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sun</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sun</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2023</year>). <article-title>Exosome-Based regimen rescues endometrial fibrosis in intrauterine adhesions Via targeting clinical fibrosis biomarkers</article-title>. <source>Stem Cells Transl. Med.</source> <volume>12</volume> (<issue>3</issue>), <fpage>154</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>168</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/stcltm/szad007</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B9">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Long</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Clarke</surname>
<given-names>M. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Morillo</surname>
<given-names>A. D. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wentzensen</surname>
<given-names>N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bakkum-Gamez</surname>
<given-names>J. N.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Ultrasound detection of endometrial cancer in women with postmenopausal bleeding: systematic review and meta-analysis</article-title>. <source>Gynecol. Oncol.</source> <volume>157</volume> (<issue>3</issue>), <fpage>624</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>633</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.01.032</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B10">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>March</surname>
<given-names>C. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Israel</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>March</surname>
<given-names>A. D.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1978</year>). <article-title>Hysteroscopic management of intrauterine adhesions</article-title>. <source>Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.</source> <volume>130</volume> (<issue>6</issue>), <fpage>653</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>657</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0002-9378(78)90322-8</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B11">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Mariani</surname>
<given-names>L. L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mancarella</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Fuso</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Baino</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Biglia</surname>
<given-names>N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Menato</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Endometrial thickness in the evaluation of clinical response to medical treatment for deep infiltrating endometriosis: a retrospective study</article-title>. <source>Arch. Gynecol. Obstet.</source> <volume>303</volume> (<issue>1</issue>), <fpage>161</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>168</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00404-020-05794-x</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B12">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Ni</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Han</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Liang</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wang</surname>
<given-names>F.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Three-dimensional 3D ultrasound combined with power Doppler for the differential diagnosis of endometrial lesions among infertile women</article-title>. <source>Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet.</source> <volume>145</volume> (<issue>2</issue>), <fpage>212</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>218</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/ijgo.12787</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B13">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Parashar</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Pajai</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Tarang</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2023</year>). <article-title>Recent advancement in the management of intrauterine adhesions using stem cell therapy: a review article</article-title>. <source>Cureus</source> <volume>15</volume> (<issue>8</issue>), <fpage>e43553</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7759/cureus.43553</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B14">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Peng</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zheng</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mao</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gong</surname>
<given-names>F.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Li</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chen</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2025</year>). <article-title>Ultrasound evaluation of changes in endometrial receptivity from the day of ovulation to the day of transfer in patients with a history of intrauterine adhesions: a prospective cohort study</article-title>. <source>Quant. Imaging Med. Surg.</source> <volume>15</volume> (<issue>5</issue>), <fpage>4541</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>4556</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.21037/qims-24-2034</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B15">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Priskorn</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>T&#xf8;ttenborg</surname>
<given-names>S. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Almstrup</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Andersson</surname>
<given-names>A. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Axelsson</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Br&#xe4;uner</surname>
<given-names>E. V.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>RUBIC (ReproUnion Biobank and Infertility Cohort): a binational clinical foundation to study risk factors, life course, and treatment of infertility and infertility-related morbidity</article-title>. <source>Andrology</source> <volume>9</volume> (<issue>6</issue>), <fpage>1828</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1842</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/andr.13063</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B16">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Wang</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bao</surname>
<given-names>N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Xin</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Tan</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Li</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhou</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Automatic evaluation of endometrial receptivity in three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound images based on 3D U-Net segmentation</article-title>. <source>Quant. Imaging Med. Surg.</source> <volume>12</volume> (<issue>8</issue>), <fpage>4095</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>4108</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.21037/qims-21-1155</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B17">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Wu</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhu</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>He</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ye</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Pang</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhao</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Clinical value of three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound in diagnosis of endometrial receptivity and ovarian function in patients with infertility</article-title>. <source>Comput. Math. Methods Med.</source> <volume>2022</volume>, <fpage>8438131</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1155/2022/8438131</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B18">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Zajicek</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kassif</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Weisz</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Berkovitz Shperling</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lipitz</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Weissbach</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>One-stop shop for the evaluation of the infertile patient: Hystero-salpingo foam sonography combined with two and three dimensional ultrasound and sonohysterography</article-title>. <source>J. Obstet. Gynaecol.</source> <volume>42</volume> (<issue>4</issue>), <fpage>670</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>674</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/01443615.2021.1929113</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B19">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Zhao</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhang</surname>
<given-names>Q.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wang</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Li</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Endometrial pattern, thickness and growth in predicting pregnancy outcome following 3319 IVF cycle</article-title>. <source>Reprod. Biomed. Online</source> <volume>29</volume> (<issue>3</issue>), <fpage>291</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>298</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.05.011</pub-id>
</citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>