Sonographic Lower Uterine Segment Thickness and Risk of Uterine Scar Defect: A Systematic Review

Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada

Volumn 32, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 321-327

  Jastrow, Nicole ^a   Chaillet, Nils ^a   Roberge, Stéphanie ^b,c   Morency, Anne Maude ^d   Lacasse, Yves ^e   Bujold, Emmanuel ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MONTREAL   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

^c LAVAL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^d MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^e LAVAL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Caesarean section; Pregnancy; Ultrasound; Uterine rupture

Indexed keywords

AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE GENITAL TRACT PARAMETERS; HUMAN; LOWER UTERINE SEGMENT THICKNESS; MYOMETRIUM; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREDICTION; PUBLICATION; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RISK FACTOR; SCAR; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; UTERINE CERVIX; UTERINE CERVIX DISEASE; UTERINE SCAR DEFECT; FEMALE; PREGNANCY; REVIEW; UTERUS; UTERUS RUPTURE;

CESAREAN SECTION; CICATRIX; FEMALE; HUMANS; PREGNANCY; UTERINE RUPTURE; UTERUS;

EID: 77954065369     PISSN: 17012163     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1701-2163(16)34475-9     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Bujold E., Gauthier R.J. Neonatal morbidity associated with uterine rupture: what are the risk factors?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002, 186:311-314.
2. Guise J.M., McDonagh M.S., Osterweil P., Nygren P., Chan B.K., Helfand M. Systematic review of the incidence and consequences of uterine rupture in women with previous caesarean section. BMJ 2004, 329:19-25.
3. McMahon M.J., Luther E.R., Bowes W.A., Olshan A.F. Comparison of a trial of labor with an elective second cesarean section. N Engl J Med 1996, 335:689-695.
4. Landon M.B., Hauth J.C., Leveno K.J., Spong C.Y., Leindecker S., Varner M.W., et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior Cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med 2004, 351:2581-2589.
5. Bujold E., Gauthier R.J., Hamilton E. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery. J Midwifery Womens Health 2005, 50:363-364.
6. Macones G.A., Peipert J., Nelson D.B., Odibo A., Stevens E.J., Stamilio D.M., et al. Maternal complications with vaginal birth after Cesarean delivery: a multicenter study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005, 193:1656-1662.
7. Pare E., Quinones J.N., Macones G.A. Vaginal birth after caesarean section versus elective repeat caesarean section: assessment of maternal downstream health outcomes. BJOG 2006, 113:75-85.
8. Fukuda M., Fukuda K., Mochizuki M. Examination of previous caesarean section scars by ultrasound. Arch Gynecol Obstet 1988, 243:221-224.
9. Rozenberg P., Goffinet F., Phillippe H.J., Nisand I. Ultrasonographic measurement of lower uterine segment to assess risk of defects of scarred uterus. Lancet 1996, 347:281-284.
10. Rozenberg P., Goffinet F., Philippe H.J., Nisand I. Thickness of the lower uterine segment: its influence in the management of patients with previous Cesarean sections. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1999, 87:39-45.
11. Cheung V.Y. Sonographic measurement of the lower uterine segment thickness in women with previous caesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2005, 27:674-681.
12. Cheung V.Y., Constantinescu O.C., Ahluwalia B.S. Sonographic evaluation of the lower uterine segment in patients with previous Cesarean delivery. J Ultrasound Med 2004, 23:1441-1447.
13. Bossuyt P.M., Reitsma J.B., Bruns D.E., Gatsonis C.A., Glasziou P.P., Irwig L.M., et al. The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2003, 138:W1-12.
14. Moses L.E., Shapiro D., Littenberg B. Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. Stat Med 1993, 12:1293-1316.
15. Jones C.M., Athanasiou T. Diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis: review of an important tool in radiological research and decision making. Br J Radiol 2009, 82:441-446.
16. Midgette A.S., Stukel T.A., Littenberg B. A meta-analytic method for summarizing diagnostic test performances:receiver-operating-characteristic-summary point estimates. Med Decis Making 1993, 13:253-257.
17. Hanley J.A., McNeil B.J. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982, 143:29-36.
18. Brown M.D., Rowe B.H., Reeves M.J., Bermingham J.M., Goldhaber S.Z. The accuracy of the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay D-dimer test in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: a meta-analysis. Ann Emerg Med 2002, 40:133-144.
19. McNeil B.J., Hanley J.A., Funkenstein H.H., Wallman J. Paired receiver operating characteristic curves and the effect of history on radiographic interpretation. CT of the head as a case study. Radiology 1983, 149:75-77.
20. Sen S., Malik S., Salhan S. Ultrasonographic evaluation of lower uterine segment thickness in patients of previous Cesarean section. Int J Obstet Gynecol 2004, 87:215-219.
21. Asakura H., Nakai A., Ishikawa G., Suzuki S., Araki T. Prediction of uterine dehiscence by measuring lower uterine segment thickness prior to the onset of labor: evaluation by transvaginal ultrasonography. J Nippon Med Sch 2000, 67:352-356.
22. Suzuki S., Sawa R., Yoneyama Y., Asakura H., Araki T. Preoperative diagnosis of dehiscence of the lower uterine segment in patients with a single previous Caesarean section. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2000, 40:402-404.
23. Gotoh H., Masuzaki H., Yoshida A., Yoshimura S., Miyamura T., Ishimaru T. Predicting incomplete uterine rupture with vaginal sonography during the late second trimester in women with prior Cesarean. Obstet Gynecol 2000, 95:596-600.
24. Montanari L., Alfei A., Drovanti A., Lepadatu C., Lorenzi D., Facchini D., et al. Transvaginal ultrasonic evaluation of the thickness of the section of the uterine wall in previous Cesarean sections [article in Italian]. Minerva Ginecol 1999, 51:107-112.
25. Tanik A., Ustun C., Cil E., Arslan A. Sonographic evaluation of the wall thickness of the lower uterine segment in patients with previous Cesarean section. J Clin Ultrasound 1996, 24:355-357.
26. Bujold E., Jastrow N., Simoneau J., Brunet S., Gauthier R.J. Prediction of complete uterine rupture by sonographic evaluation of the lower uterine segment. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009, 201:e1-e6.
27. Bergeron M.E., Jastrow N., Brassard N., Paris G., Bujold E. Sonography of lower uterine segment thickness and prediction of uterine rupture. Obstet Gynecol 2009, 113:520-522.
28. Cheung V.Y., Rozenberg P. Sonography of lower uterine segment thickness and prediction of uterine rupture. Obstet Gynecol 2009, 113:1371. [letter]; author reply same issue 1372.
29. Jastrow N., Antonelli E., Robyr R., Irion O., Boulvain M. Inter- and intraobserver variability in sonographic measurement of the lower uterine segment after a previous Cesarean section. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006, 27:420-424.
30. Martins W.P., Barra D.A., Gallarreta F.M., Nastri C.O., Filho F.M. Lower uterine segment thickness measurement in pregnant women with previous Cesarean section: reliability analysis using two- and three-dimensional transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009, 33:301-306.
31. Bujold E., Mehta S.H., Bujold C., Gauthier R.J. Interdelivery interval and uterine rupture. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002, 187:1199-1202.
32. Shipp T.D., Zelop C.M., Repke J.T., Cohen A., Lieberman E. Interdelivery interval and risk of symptomatic uterine rupture. Obstet Gynecol 2001, 97:175-177.
33. Stamilio D.M., DeFranco E., Pare E., Odibo A.O., Peipert J.F., Allsworth J.E., et al. Short interpregnancy interval: risk of uterine rupture and complications of vaginal birth after Cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2007, 110:1075-1082.
34. Bujold E., Bujold C., Hamilton E.F., Harel F., Gauthier R.J. The impact of a single-layer or double-layer closure on uterine rupture. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002, 186:1326-1330.
35. Hendler I., Bujold E. Effect of prior vaginal delivery or prior vaginal birth after Cesarean delivery on obstetric outcomes in women undergoing trial of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2004, 104:273-277.
36. Hamilton E.F., Bujold E., McNamara H., Gauthier R., Platt R.W. Dystocia among women with symptomatic uterine rupture. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001, 184:620-624.
37. Cheung V.Y. Sonographic measurement of the lower uterine segment thickness: is it truly predictive of uterine rupture?. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2008, 30:148-151.
38. Macones G.A., Cahill A.G., Stamilio D.M., Odibo A., Peipert J., Stevens E.J. Can uterine rupture in patients attempting vaginal birth after Cesarean delivery be predicted?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006, 195:1148-1152.
39. Grobman W.A., Lai Y., Landon M.B., Spong C.Y., Leveno K.J., Rouse D.J. Prediction of uterine rupture associated with attempted vaginal birth after Cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008, 199:e1-e5.
40. Morency A.M., Brassard N., Gauthier R.J. Can uterine rupture in patients attempting vaginal birth after Cesarean delivery be predicted?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007, 196.
41. Bujold E., Jastrow N., Gauthier R.J. Assessment of the rate of uterine rupture at the first prenatal visit: a preliminary evaluation. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2008, 21:507-508.