Changes in Cesarean section scar dimensions during pregnancy: A prospective longitudinal study

Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 41, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 556-562

  Naji, O ^a,b   Daemen, A ^c   Smith, A ^a   Abdallah, Y ^a,b   Saso, S ^b   Stalder, C ^a   Sayasneh, A ^a,b   McIndoe, A ^d   Ghaem Maghami, S ^b   Timmerman, D ^c   Bourne, T ^a,b,c  

^a QUEEN CHARLOTTE S AND CHELSEA HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^d WELLINGTON HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cesarean section scar; transvaginal ultrasonography; VBAC

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FETUS ECHOGRAPHY; HUMAN; PATHOLOGY; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY COMPLICATION; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCAR; UTERUS RUPTURE;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CESAREAN SECTION; CICATRIX; FEMALE; HUMANS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY COMPLICATIONS; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PREGNANCY TRIMESTERS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, PRENATAL; UTERINE RUPTURE;

EID: 84876565575     PISSN: 09607692     EISSN: 14690705     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/uog.12334     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. Armstrong V, Hansen WF, Van Voorhis BJ, Syrop CH,. Detection of cesarean scars by transvaginal ultrasound. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 101: 61-65. (Pubitemid 36057089)
2. Bij de Vaate AJ, Brolmann 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.
3. 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.
4. Burger NF, Darazs B, Boes EG,. An echographic evaluation during the early puerperium of the uterine wound after caesarean section. J Clin Ultrasound 1982; 10: 271-274. (Pubitemid 12045159)
5. Ofili-Yebovi D, Ben-Nagi J, Sawyer E, Yazbek J, Lee C, Gonzalez J, Jurkovic D,. Deficient lower-segment Cesarean section scars: prevalence and risk factors. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008; 31: 72-77. (Pubitemid 351211934)
6. Vikhareva Osser O, 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.
7. Zimmer EZ, Bardin R, Tamir A, Bronshtein M,. Sonographic imaging of cervical scars after Cesarean section. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 23: 594-598. (Pubitemid 38829870)
8. Stirnemann JJ, Chalouhi GE, Forner S, Saidji Y, Salomon LJ, Bernard JP, Ville Y,. First-trimester uterine scar assessment by transvaginal ultrasound. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011; 205: 551 e1- 6.
9. Naji O, Abdallah Y, Bij de Vaate A, Smith A, Pexsters A, Stalder C, McIndoe A, Ghaem-Maghami S, Lees C, Brolmann HA, Huirne JA, Timmerman D, Bourne T,. Standardized approach for imaging and measuring Cesarean section scars using ultrasonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012; 39: 252-259.
10. 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)
11. 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 School 2000; 67: 352-256.
12. Qureshi B, Inafuku K, Oshima K, Masamoto H, Kanazawa K,. Ultrasonographic evaluation of lower uterine segment to predict the integrity and quality of cesarean scar during pregnancy: a prospective study. Tohoku J Exp Med 1997; 183: 55-65. (Pubitemid 127471157)
13. 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. (Pubitemid 30139583)
14. Sen S, Malik S, Salhan S,. Ultrasonographic evaluation of lower uterine segment thickness in patients of previous cesarean section. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2004; 87: 215-219. (Pubitemid 39535081)
15. McMahon MJ, Luther ER, Bowes WA, Jr., Olshan AF,. Comparison of a trial of labor with an elective second cesarean section. N Engl J Med 1996; 335: 689-695. (Pubitemid 26287354)
16. 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.
17. Ozdemir I, Yucel N, Yucel O,. Rupture of the pregnant uterus: a 9-year review. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2005; 272: 229-231. (Pubitemid 41413994)
18. Klipper-Aurbach Y, Wasserman M, Braunspiegel-Weintrob N, Borstein D, Peleg S, Assa S, Karp M, Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y, Laron Z,. Mathematical formulae for the prediction of the residual beta cell function during the first two years of disease in children and adolescents with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Med Hypotheses 1995; 45: 486-490.
19. 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.
20. 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- 6.
21. Naji O, Daemen A, Smith A, Abdallah Y, Saso S, Stalder C, Sayasneh A, McIndoe A, Ghaem-Maghami S, Timmerman D, Bourne T,. Visibility and measurement of cesarean section scars in pregnancy: a reproducibility study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012; 40: 549-556.
22. Schugart RC, Friedman A, Zhao R, Sen CK,. Wound angiogenesis as a function of tissue oxygen tension: a mathematical model. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008; 105: 2628-2633. (Pubitemid 351520564)
23. Pittman J., Effect of aging on wound healing: current concepts. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 2007; 34: 412-415.
24. Roeder HA, Cramer SF, Leppert PC,. A look at uterine wound healing through a histopathological study of uterine scars. Reprod Sci 2012; 19: 463-473.