Sonographic assessment of post-cesarean section uterine scar in pregnant women

被引:3
作者
Markovitch, Ofer [1 ]
Tepper, Ronnie [1 ]
Hershkovitz, Reli [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Tel Aviv Univ, Sackler Fac Med, Meir Univ Med Ctr, Ultrasound Unit,Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Kefar Sava, Israel
[2] Ben Gurion Univ Negev, Fac Hlth Sci, Dept Obstet, Ultrasound Unit, Beer Sheva, Israel
[3] Ben Gurion Univ Negev, Fac Hlth Sci, Dept Gynecol, Beer Sheva, Israel
关键词
Ultrasound demonstration; uterine cesarean scar; PREVIOUS CESAREAN DELIVERY; TRANSVAGINAL ULTRASOUND; SEGMENT; SONOHYSTEROGRAPHY; PREVALENCE; THICKNESS; SYMPTOMS; DEFECTS;
D O I
10.3109/14767058.2012.722722
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Purpose: To detect location of uterine cesarean scar in relation to cervix in pregnancies with previous cesarean section (CS) and to compare location between elective and emergent previous CS. Study design: Prospective study, 91 pregnant women with previous low transverse CS. Two groups: previous elective [36 (39.6%)] and emergent CS [55 (60.4%)]. Transvaginal ultrasound was performed between 14 and 16 weeks. Cervical length (CL) and distance between external oss to hypoechogenic line (EO-HL distance), which describes location of cesarean scar, were measured. Surgical incision was considered cervical when EO-HL distance was smaller than CL. Results: Mean CL and EO-HL distance: 45.4 + 7. 0 and 39.0 + 9.4 mm, respectively for all patients. No significant differences were observed in CL (45.9 + 6.2 vs. 45.1 + 8.5 mm; p = not significant [NS]) and EO-HL distance (40.7 + 9.7 vs. 37.9 + 9.1 mm; p = NS) between both groups. Sixty-four cases (70.3%) had cervical scar, eight (8.8%) at the level of the internal oss and 19 (20.9) in the lower uterine segment. No significant difference was observed between both groups regarding location of scar (cervix -72 vs. 67% emergent vs. elective, respectively; p = NS). Conclusion: CS incisions are mostly performed in cervix, in elective as well as in emergent operations.
引用
收藏
页码:173 / 175
页数:3
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]   Detection of cesarean scars by transvaginal ultrasound [J].
Armstrong, V ;
Hansen, WF ;
Van Voorhis, BJ ;
Syrop, CH .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2003, 101 (01) :61-65
[3]   OBSERVATION OF CESAREAN-SECTION SCAR BY TRANSVAGINAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY [J].
CHEN, HY ;
CHEN, SJ ;
HSIEH, FJ .
ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 1990, 16 (05) :443-447
[4]   ULTRASOUND EXAMINATION OF CESAREAN-SECTION SCARS DURING PREGNANCY [J].
FUKUDA, M ;
SHIMIZU, T ;
IHARA, Y ;
FUKUDA, K ;
NATSUYAMA, E ;
MOCHIZUKI, M .
ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS, 1991, 248 (03) :129-138
[5]   EXAMINATION OF PREVIOUS CESAREAN-SECTION SCARS BY ULTRASOUND [J].
FUKUDA, M ;
FUKUDA, K ;
MOCHIZUKI, M .
ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS, 1988, 243 (04) :221-224
[6]   Sonographic Lower Uterine Segment Thickness and Risk of Uterine Scar Defect: A Systematic Review [J].
Jastrow, Nicole ;
Chaillet, Nils ;
Roberge, Stephanie ;
Morency, Anne-Maude ;
Lacasse, Yves ;
Bujold, Emmanuel .
JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY CANADA, 2010, 32 (04) :321-327
[7]   Cesarean delivery: Background, trends, and epidemiology [J].
Menacker, Fay ;
Declercq, Eugene ;
Macdorman, Marian F. .
SEMINARS IN PERINATOLOGY, 2006, 30 (05) :235-241
[8]   Saline infusion sonohysterography in nonpregnant women with previous cesarean delivery - The 'niche' in the scar [J].
Monteagudo, A ;
Carreno, C ;
Timor-Tritsch, IE .
JOURNAL OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE, 2001, 20 (10) :1105-1115
[9]   Deficient lower-segment Cesarean section scars: prevalence and risk factors [J].
Ofili-Yebovi, D. ;
Ben-Nagi, J. ;
Sawyer, E. ;
Yazbek, J. ;
Lee, C. ;
Gonzalez, J. ;
Jurkovic, D. .
ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2008, 31 (01) :72-77
[10]   Cesarean section scar defects: agreement between transvaginal sonographic findings with and without saline contrast enhancement [J].
Osser, O. Vikhareva ;
Jokubkiene, L. ;
Valentin, L. .
ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2010, 35 (01) :75-83