Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sonographic assessment of lower uterine segment at term in women with previous cesarean delivery

  • Materno-fetal Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To correlate lower uterine segment (LUS) thickness measured by abdominal sonography at term pregnancy with that measured manually using caliper at cesarean delivery and to find out minimum LUS thickness indicative of its integrity in women with previous cesarean.

Methods

In 106 women with previous cesarean delivery and 68 with unscarred uterus, abdominal sonographic assessment of LUS was carried out within a week of delivery. Sonographic measurements were correlated with manual measurement of lower flap of LUS using Vernier calipers in 96 of these women (64 with previous cesarean and 32 of unscarred uterus) who had elective cesarean delivery.

Results

Sonographically determined LUS was thinner among women with previous cesarean delivery than in those without (4.58 SD 1.05 vs. 4.8 SD 0.8; t = 1.986; p = 0.04). Women with vaginal birth after cesarean had thicker LUS than women with repeat cesarean delivery (4.4 SD 0.97 vs. 4.48 SD 1.0). The findings were not influenced by engaged fetal head status or amount of bladder fullness. Directly measured LUS thickness using Vernier calipers before delivery of the baby confirmed ultrasound measurements, but showed smaller differences between them. There were eight cases with defective uterine scar at cesarean. LUS thickness at term of 3 mm provided 87.5% sensitivity and specificity, and was found to have negative predictive value of 98%. But in two of seven cases the actual LUS was not measurable despite sonographic measurement of 3 mm, and there were two records of scar dehiscence in those with 3 and 4 mm of LUS thickness.

Conclusion

LUS thickness of 3 mm measured by abdominal ultrasonography prior to delivery at term in women with previous cesarean is suggestive of stronger LUS but is not a reliable safeguard for trial of labor.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Thomas J, Paranjothy S (2001) Royal college of obstetricians and gynaecologists clinical effectiveness support unit. national sentinel caesarean section audit report. RCOG Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lydon-Rochelle M, Holt VL, Easterling R, Martin DP (2001) Risk of uterine rupture during labor among women with a prior cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med 345:3–8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cheung VYT, Constantinescu OC, Ahluwalia BS (2004) Sonographic evaluation of the lower uterine segment in patients with previous cesarean delivery. J Ultrasound Med 23:1441–1447

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rozenberg P, Goffnet F, Philippe HJ, Nisand I (1996) Ultrasonographic measurement of lower uterine segment to assess risk of defects of scarred uterus. Lancet 347(8997):281–284

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rozenberg P, Goffinet F, Philippe HJ, Nisand I (1999) Thickness of the lower uterine segment: its influence in the management of patients with previous cesarean sections. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 87:39–45

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bujold E, Jastrow N, Simoneau J, Brunet S, Gauthier RJ (2009) Prediction of complete uterine rupture by sonographic evaluation of the lower uterine segment. Am J Obstet Gynecol 201:320. e1-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Quereshi B, Inafku K, Oshima K, Masamoto H, Koj K (1997) Ultrasonographic evaluation of lower uterine segment to predict the integrity and quality of cesarean scar during pregnancy: a prospective study. Tohuku J Exp Med 183:55–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Michaels WH, Thompson HO, Bout A, Schreiber FR, Michaels SL, Karo J (1988) Ultrasound diagnosis of defects in the scarred lower uterine segment during pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 71:112–120

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Jastrow N, Antonelli E, Robyr R, Irion O, Boulvain M (2006) Inter- and intraobserver variability in sonographic measurement of the lower uterine segment after a previous cesarean section. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 27:420–424

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Martins WP, Barra DA, Gallarreta FMP, Nastri CO, Filho FM (2009) 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 33:301–306

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Leung AS, Leung EK, Paul RH (1993) Uterine rupture after previous cesarean delivery: maternal and fetal consequences. Am J Obstet Gynecol 169:945–950

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Asakura H, Nakai A, Ishikawa G, Suzuki S, Araki T (2000) Prediction of uterine dehiscence by measuring lower uterine segment thickness prior to the onset of labor: evaluation by transvaginal ultrasonography. J Nippon Med Sch 67:352–356

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cheung VY (2005) Sonographic measurement of the lower uterine segment thickness in women with previous caesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 27:674–681

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gotoh H, Masuzaki H, Yoshida A, Yoshimura S, Miyamura T, Ishimaru T (2000) Predicting incomplete uterine rupture with vaginal sonography during the late second trimester in women with prior cesarean. Obstet Gynecol 95:596–600

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sen S, Malik S, Salhan S (2004) Ultrasonographic evaluation of lower uterine segment thickness in patients of previous cesarean section. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 87:215–219

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Baliga S, Grover B (1999) Ultrasonographic monitoring of scarred lower uterine segment during pregnancy. Obstet Gynaecol Commun 2:23–28

    Google Scholar 

  17. Tanik A, Ustun C, Cil E, Arslan A (1996) Sonographic evaluation of the wall thickness of the lower uterine segment in patients with previous caesarean section. J Clin Ultrasound 24:355–357

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cheung VY (2008) Sonographic measurement of the lower uterine segment thickness: is it truly predictive of uterine rupture? J Obstet Gynaecol Can 30:148–151

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest statement

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, 576104, India

    Suneeta Garepalli

  2. 1, KMC Quarters Manipal University Campus, Manipal, 576104, India

    Pralhad Kushtagi

Authors
  1. Pralhad Kushtagi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Suneeta Garepalli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pralhad Kushtagi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kushtagi, P., Garepalli, S. Sonographic assessment of lower uterine segment at term in women with previous cesarean delivery. Arch Gynecol Obstet 283, 455–459 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1384-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1384-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation