Prevalence, definition, and etiology of cesarean scar defect and treatment of cesarean scar disorder: A narrative review

被引:29
作者
Tsuji, Shunichiro [1 ,2 ]
Nobuta, Yuri [1 ]
Hanada, Tetsuro [1 ]
Takebayashi, Aike [1 ]
Inatomi, Ayako [1 ]
Takahashi, Akimasa [1 ]
Amano, Tsukuru [1 ]
Murakami, Takashi [1 ]
机构
[1] Shiga Univ Med Sci, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Otsu, Shiga, Japan
[2] Shiga Univ Med Sci, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Seta Tsukinowa-cho, Otsu, Shiga 5202192, Japan
关键词
cesarean scar defect; cesarean scar disorder; cesarean section; hysteroscopic surgery; secondary infertility; LAPAROSCOPIC REPAIR; VAGINAL REPAIR; SECONDARY INFERTILITY; SECTION SCAR; TRANSVAGINAL REPAIR; HYSTEROSCOPIC SURGERY; SUBSEQUENT FERTILITY; BLEEDING SECONDARY; UTERINE NICHE; RISK-FACTORS;
D O I
10.1002/rmb2.12532
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
BackgroundCesarean scar defects (CSD) are caused by cesarean sections and cause various symptoms. Although there has been no previous consensus on the name of this condition for a long time, it has been named cesarean scar disorder (CSDi). MethodsThis review summarizes the definition, prevalence, and etiology of CSD, as well as the pathophysiology and treatment of CSDi. We focused on surgical therapy and examined the effects and procedures of laparoscopy, hysteroscopy, and transvaginal surgery. Main findingsThe definition of CSD was proposed as an anechoic lesion with a depth of at least 2 mm because of the varied prevalence, owing to the lack of consensus. CSD incidence depends on the number of times, procedure, and situation of cesarean sections. Histopathological findings in CSD are fibrosis and adenomyosis, and chronic inflammation in the uterine and pelvic cavities decreases fertility in women with CSDi. Although the surgical procedures are not standardized, laparoscopic, hysteroscopic, and transvaginal surgeries are effective. ConclusionThe cause and pathology of CSDi are becoming clear. However, there is variability in the prevalence and treatment strategies. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct further studies using the same definitions.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 118 条
[1]   Comparison of the Histopathologic Features of Uterine Niches Between Hysterectomy Specimens and Hysteroscopy-Resected Isthmoceles [J].
AbdullGaffar, Badr ;
Farhan, Rabiah ;
Alsuwaidi, Shaimah .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGICAL PATHOLOGY, 2022, 30 (06) :716-722
[2]   Laparoscopic repair of a symptomatic post-cesarean section isthmocele: a video case report [J].
Aimi, Giorgio ;
Buggio, Laura ;
Berlanda, Nicola ;
Vercellini, Paolo .
FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2017, 107 (06) :E17-E18
[4]   Comparison of transvaginal ultrasound and saline contrast sonohysterography in evaluation of cesarean scar defect: a prospective cohort study [J].
Antila-Langsjo, Riitta ;
Maenpaa, Johanna U. ;
Huhtala, Heini ;
Tomas, Eija ;
Staff, Synnove .
ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2018, 97 (09) :1130-1136
[5]   Cesarean scar defect: a prospective study on risk factors [J].
Antila-Langsjo, Riitta M. ;
Maenpaa, Johanna U. ;
Huhtala, Heini S. ;
Tomas, Eija, I ;
Staff, Synnove M. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2018, 219 (05) :458.e1-458.e8
[6]  
Bakaviciute Greta, 2016, Acta Med Litu, V23, P227, DOI 10.6001/actamedica.v23i4.3424
[7]  
Baldini GM, 2022, EUR REV MED PHARMACO, V26, P5520, DOI 10.26355/eurrev_202208_29423
[8]   Analysis on clinical association of uterine scar diverticulum with subsequent infertility in patients underwent cesarean section [J].
Bi, Beilei ;
Gao, Shanshan ;
Ruan, Fan ;
Shi, Yin ;
Jiang, Yi ;
Liu, Songjun ;
Lv, Wen .
MEDICINE, 2021, 100 (41) :E27531
[9]   Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean sections [J].
Boerma, Ties ;
Ronsmans, Carine ;
Melesse, Dessalegn Y. ;
Barros, Aluisio J. D. ;
Barros, Fernando C. ;
Juan, Liang ;
Moller, Ann-Beth ;
Say, Lale ;
Hosseinpoor, Ahmad Reza ;
Yi, Mu ;
Rabello Neto, Dacio de Lyra ;
Temmerman, Marleen .
LANCET, 2018, 392 (10155) :1341-1348
[10]   Uterine niche after cesarean section: a review of diagnostic methods [J].
Budny-Winska, Joanna ;
Pomorski, Michal .
GINEKOLOGIA POLSKA, 2021, 92 (10) :726-730