Systematic review of cesarean scar assessment in the nonpregnant state: Imaging techniques and uterine scar defect

American Journal of Perinatology

Volumn 29, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 465-472

  Roberge, Stéphanie ^a,b   Boutin, Amélie ^a,b   Chaillet, Nils ^c   Moore, Lynne ^a,b   Jastrow, Nicole ^d   Demers, Suzanne ^a   Bujold, Emmanuel ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

^b LAVAL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^d GENEVA UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

cesarean; imaging techniques; scar defects; ultrasound

Indexed keywords

CESAREAN SECTION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HEALING IMPAIRMENT; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; HYSTEROGRAPHY; LOW TRANSVERSE CESAREAN; NONPREGNANT STATE; PREGNANCY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK FACTOR; SCAR; SONOHYSTEROGRAPHY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TRANSVAGINAL ECHOGRAPHY; UTERINE CESAREAN SCAR; UTERINE SCAR DEFECT; UTERUS RUPTURE; WOUND DEHISCENCE;

ADULT; CESAREAN SECTION; CICATRIX; FEMALE; HUMANS; PREGNANCY; RISK FACTORS; SURGICAL WOUND DEHISCENCE; ULTRASONOGRAPHY; UTERINE RUPTURE; WOUND HEALING;

EID: 84861230797     PISSN: 07351631     EISSN: 10988785     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1304829     Document Type: Review

References (45)

1. Jastrow N, Chaillet N, Roberge S, Morency AM, Lacasse Y, Bujold E. Sonographic lower uterine segment thickness and risk of uterine scar defect: a systematic review. J Obstet Gynaecol Can: 2010; 32 321 327
2. Guise JM, McDonagh MS, Osterweil P, Nygren P, Chan BK, Helfand M. Systematic review of the incidence and consequences of uterine rupture in women with previous caesarean section. BMJ: 2004; 329 19 25
3. Bujold E, Gauthier RJ. Neonatal morbidity associated with uterine rupture: what are the risk factors? Am J Obstet Gynecol: 2002; 186 311 314 (Pubitemid 34165453)
4. Vikhareva Osser O, Valentin L. Clinical importance of appearance of cesarean hysterotomy scar at transvaginal ultrasonography in nonpregnant women. Obstet Gynecol: 2011; 117 525 532
5. Spong CY, Queenan JT. Uterine scar assessment: how should it be done before trial of labor after cesarean delivery? Obstet Gynecol: 2011; 117 521 522
6. Menada Valenzano M, Lijoi D, Mistrangelo E, Costantini S, Ragni N. Vaginal ultrasonographic and hysterosonographic evaluation of the low transverse incision after caesarean section: correlation with gynaecological symptoms. Gynecol Obstet Invest: 2006; 61 216 222
7. Regnard C, Nosbusch M, Fellemans C., et al. Cesarean section scar evaluation by saline contrast sonohysterography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol: 2004; 23 289 292 (Pubitemid 38365809)
8. Lal K, Tsomo P. Comparative study of single layer and conventional closure of uterine incision in cesarean section. Int J Gynaecol Obstet: 1988; 27 349 352
9. Osser OV, Jokubkiene L, Valentin L. High prevalence of defects in Cesarean section scars at transvaginal ultrasound examination. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol: 2009; 34 90 97
10. Zilberman A, Sharf M, Polishuk WZ. Evaluation of cesarean section scar by hysterography. Obstet Gynecol: 1968; 32 153 157
11. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ: 2003; 327 557 560 (Pubitemid 37088507)
12. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials: 1986; 7 177 188 (Pubitemid 17189972)
13. Serfaty SO, Repetto E, Esteban A. Estudio radiologico de la cicatriz de cesarea. Sociedad de Obstetrica y Ginecologia de Buenos Aires: 1960; 39 327 334
14. Lomnberg C, Astorquiza J, Rodriguez A, Carvajal C. Estudio Radiologico de la cicatriz uterina en cesarea, Revisat Chilena. Obstet Ginecol (Bucur): 1962; 27 19 27
15. Tasca E, Boffano M. [Hysterosalpingography as control method for the post-cesarean uterine cicatrix]. Quad Clin Ostet Ginecol: 1962; 17 915 928
16. Ende S, Hall GS, Liang DYS, Murdoch JD. Hysterography after caesarean section. Br J Radiol: 1963; 36 720 724
17. Obolensky W, Zurcher WO. Hysterography as an objective method for assessment of the scar after caesarean section. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd: 1963; 23 101 104
18. Durkan JP. Hysterography after cesarean section. Obstet Gynecol: 1964; 24 836 840
19. Pasetto N, DAnna A, Niccoli V, Decamillis L. The clinical problem involved in the radiographic assessment of the uterine scar following lower-segment caesarean section. Panminerva Med: 1964; 201 16 21
20. Thoulon JM. tude clinique et hystrographique de la cicatrice utrine en fonction de la technique de la csarienne segmentaire. Edited by Lyon Hôpitaux de Lyon: 1966; 127
21. Waniorek A. Hysterography after cesarean section. With special reference to the effect of subsequent delivery on the hysterographic findings. Am J Obstet Gynecol: 1966; 94 42 49
22. Waniorek A. Hysterography after cesarean section for evaluation of suturing technic. Obstet Gynecol: 1967; 29 192 199
23. Bret AJ, Sanchez Ramos J. [Histerographic, clinical and histological study of transverse and longitudinal segmental cesarean scars]. Rev Fr Gynecol Obstet: 1968; 63 573 600
24. Camilleri AP, Busuttil T. "Twice a saesarean.o" J Obstet Gynaecol Br Commonw: 1968; 75 1305 1308
25. Seewald HJ, Stech D, Wetzel E. [Hysterographic examinations following cesarean section]. Zentralbl Gynakol: 1973; 95 1297 1301
26. Chen HY, Chen SJ, Hsieh FJ. Observation of cesarean section scar by transvaginal ultrasonography. Ultrasound Med Biol: 1990; 16 443 447
27. Armstrong V, Hansen WF, Van Voorhis BJ, Syrop CH. Detection of cesarean scars by transvaginal ultrasound. Obstet Gynecol: 2003; 101 61 65 (Pubitemid 36057089)
28. Troyano JM, Clavijo MT, Casas S, Martinez-Wallin I, Marco OY, Zurita A. Cesarean scar hysterotomy. Assessment by 3D transvaginal-echography. Ultrasound Rev Obstet Gynecol: 2004; 4 208 213 (Pubitemid 40514771)
29. Hayakawa H, Itakura A, Mitsui T., et al. Methods for myometrium closure and other factors impacting effects on cesarean section scars of the uterine segment detected by the ultrasonography. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand: 2006; 85 429 434 (Pubitemid 43879191)
30. Osser OV, Jokubkiene L, Valentin L. Cesarean section scar defects: agreement between transvaginal sonographic findings with and without saline contrast enhancement. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol: 2010; 35 75 83
31. Vikhareva Osser O, Valentin L. Risk factors for incomplete healing of the uterine incision after caesarean section. BJOG: 2010; 117 1119 1126
32. Bij de Vaate AJ, Brölmann HA, van der Voet LF, van der Slikke JW, Veersema S, Huirne JA. Ultrasound evaluation of the cesarean scar: relation between a niche and postmenstrual spotting. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol: 2011; 37 93 99
33. Rozenberg P, Goffinet F, Phillippe HJ, Nisand I. Ultrasonographic measurement of lower uterine segment to assess risk of defects of scarred uterus. Lancet: 1996; 347 281 284 (Pubitemid 26041038)
34. Bujold E, Jastrow N, Simoneau J, Brunet S, Gauthier RJ. Prediction of complete uterine rupture by sonographic evaluation of the lower uterine segment. Am J Obstet Gynecol: 2009; 201 320, e1-e6
35. Jastrow N, Gauthier RJ, Gagnon G, Leroux N, Beaudoin F, Bujold E. Impact of labor at prior cesarean on lower uterine segment thickness in subsequent pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol: 2010; 202 563, e1-e7
36. Poidevin LOS. The value of hysterography in the prediction of cesarean section wound defects. Am J Obstet Gynecol: 1961; 81 67 71
37. Bujold E, Mehta SH, Bujold C, Gauthier RJ. Interdelivery interval and uterine rupture. Am J Obstet Gynecol: 2002; 187 1199 1202 (Pubitemid 35397458)
38. Dicle O, Küükler C, Pirnar T, Erata Y, Posaci C. Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of incision healing after cesarean sections. Eur Radiol: 1997; 7 31 34 (Pubitemid 127538516)
39. Shipp TD, Zelop CM, Repke JT, Cohen A, Caughey AB, Lieberman E. Intrapartum uterine rupture and dehiscence in patients with prior lower uterine segment vertical and transverse incisions. Obstet Gynecol: 1999; 94 5 Pt 1 735 740 (Pubitemid 29484441)
40. Unnerus CE, Kalaja S. X-ray examination of the uterus after caesarean section. Ann Chir Gynaecol Fenn: 1965; 54 181 190
41. Bujold E, Goyet M, Marcoux S., et al. The role of uterine closure in the risk of uterine rupture. Obstet Gynecol: 2010; 116 43 50
42. Bujold E, Bujold C, Hamilton EF, Harel F, Gauthier RJ. The impact of a single-layer or double-layer closure on uterine rupture. Am J Obstet Gynecol: 2002; 186 1326 1330 (Pubitemid 34665079)
43. Roberge S, Chaillet N, Boutin A., et al. Single- versus double-layer closure of the hysterotomy incision during cesarean delivery and risk of uterine rupture. Int J Gynaecol Obstet: 2011; 115 5 10
44. Shipp TD, Zelop C, Cohen A, Repke JT, Lieberman E. Post-cesarean delivery fever and uterine rupture in a subsequent trial of labor. Obstet Gynecol: 2003; 101 136 139 (Pubitemid 36057099)
45. Poidevin LOS. Caesarean section scar safety. BMJ: 1959; 2 1058 1061