Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ultrasonography of the uterus within 6 weeks following Cesarean section

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Central European Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Objective

The aim of the study was to compare the integrity of the uterine scar after elective and urgent Caesarean section (CS) and specify a technique to describe the sonographic findings.

Methods

Ultrasound examination was performed in 131 women at 48 and 96 hours (transabdominal), and 6 weeks (transvaginal) after CS. We assessed numerous clinical and ultrasound variables. To quantify the severity of the scar defect, we describe a “dehiscence risk coefficient” (DRC).

Results

Mean myometrial thickness above the scar and below the scar 6 weeks after CS was 12.1 ± 2.5 mm and 11.5 ± 2.5 mm, respectively. The mean scar thickness after elective and urgent CS was 7.68 ± 2.27 mm and 4.9 mm ± 2.21 mm, respectively. The cut-off value (5th percentile) for the CS scar thickness and for DRC was 2.9 mm and 0.25, respectively. DRC less than 0.25 was elected to consider a severe scar defect, which was diagnosed in 14/131 (10.7%) patients, 1.5% after elective CS and 9.2% after urgent CS. (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Dehiscence risk coefficient measurement six weeks after delivery allows for precise quantitative description of the CS scar. Urgent CS has a higher risk for a severe scar defect.

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. Antonelli E., Morales M.A., Dumps P., Boulvain M., Weil A. Sonographic detection of fluid collections and postoperative morbidity following Cesarean section and hysterectomy, Ultrasound. Obstet. Gynecol,. 2004, 23, 388–392

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hadar E., Melamed N., Tzadikevitch-Geffen K., Yogev Y. Timing and risk factors of maternal complications of cesarean section, Arch. Gynecol. Obstet., 2011, 283(4), 735–741

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Loverro G., Greco P., Vimercati A., Nicolardi V., Varcaccio-Garofalo G., Selvaggi L. Maternal complications associated with cesarean section, J. Perinat. Med., 2001, 29(4), 322–326

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Gemer O., Shenhav S., Segal S., Harari D., Segal O., Zohav E. Sonographically diagnosed pelvic hematomas and post-cesarean febrile morbidity, Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet., 1999, 65, 7–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ben Nagi J., Ofili-Yebovi D., Marsh M., Jurkovic D. First trimester Cesarean scar pregnancy evolving into placenta previa/accreta at term, J. Ultrasound. Med., 2005, 24, 1569–1573

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jurkovic D., Hillaby K., Woelfer B., Lawrence A., Salim R., Elson C. First-trimester diagnosis and management of pregnancies implanted into the lower uterine segment Cesarean section scar, Ultrasound. Obstet. Gynecol., 2003, 21, 220–227

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Becker R.H., Vonk R., Mende B.C., Ragosch V., Entezami M. The relevance of placental location at 20–23 gestational weeks for prediction of placenta previa at delivery: evaluation of 8650 cases, Ultrasound. Obstet. Gynecol., 2001, 17, 496–501

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Oyelese Y., Smulian J.C. Placenta previa, placenta accreta, and vasa previa, Obstet. Gynecol., 2006, 107, 927–941

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ofili-Yebovi D., Ben-Nagi J., Sawyer E., Yazbek J., Lee C., Gonzalez J., Jurkovic D. Deficient lowersegment Cesarean section scars: prevalence and risk factors, Ultrasound. Obstet. Gynecol., 2008, 31, 72–77

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kushtagi P., Garepalli S. Sonographic assessment of lower uterine segment at term in women with previous cesarean delivery, Arch. Gynecol. Obstet., 2011, 283(3), 455–459

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jastrow N., Chaillet N., Roberge S., Morency A.M., Lacasse Y., Bujold E. Sonographic lower uterine segment thickness and risk of uterine scar defect: a systematic review, J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Can., 2010, 32(4), 321–327

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Shalev J., Royburt M., Fite G., Mashiach R., Schoenfeld A., Bar J., Ben-Rafael Z., Meizner I. Sonographic evaluation of the puerperal uterus: correlation with manual examination. Gynecol. Obstet. Invest., 2002, 53, 38–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Koskas M., Nizard J., Salomon L.J., Ville Y. Abdominal and pelvic ultrasound findings within 24 hours following uneventful Cesarean section, Ultrasound. Obstet. Gynecol., 2008, 32, 520–526

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Sokol E.R., Casele H., Haney E.I. Ultrasound examination of the postpartum uterus: what is normal?, J. Matern. Fetal. Neonatal. Med., 2004, 15, 95–99

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Goodlin R.C. Modified Joel-Cohen technique for caesarean delivery, Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol., 1999, 106(12), 1329

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Buhimschi C.S., Zhao G., Sora N., Madri J.A., Buhimschi I.A. Myometrial Wound Healing Post-Cesarean Delivery in the MRL/MpJ Mouse Model of Uterine Scarring, Am. J. Pathol., 2010, 177, 197–207

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Dicle O., Kucukler C., Pirnar T., Erata Y., Posaci C. Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of incision healing after cesarean sections, Eur. Radiol., 1997, 7, 31–34

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Falanga V. The chronic wound: impaired healing and solutions in the context of wound bed preparation, Blood Cells, Molecules, and Diseases, 2004, 32, 88–94

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Schugart R.C., Friedman A., Zhao R., Sen C.K. Wound angiogenesis as a function of tissue oxygen tension: a mathematical model, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2008, 105, 2628–3633

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Tinelli A., Malvasi A., Vittori G. Laparoscopic treatment of post-cesarean section bladder flap hematoma: A feasible and safe approach, Minim. Invasive. Ther. Allied. Technol., 2009, 18(6), 356–360

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Vikhareva Osser O., Valentin L. Risk factors for incomplete healing of the uterine incision after caesarean section, BJOG, 2010, 117(9), 1119–1126

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Vikhareva Osser O., Jokubkiene L., Valentin L. (2008), OP23.01: Long duration of labor and postpartum anemia increase the risk of large defects in caesarean section scars. Ultrasound. Obstet. Gynecol., 32, 389. doi: 10.1002/uog.5868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Regnard C., Nosbusch M., Fellemans C., Benalli N., Van Rysselberghe M., Barlow P., Rozenberg S. Cesarean section scar evaluation by saline contrast sonohysterography, Ultrasound. Obstet. Gynecol., 2004, 23, 289–292

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Wound healing, chronic wounds http://www.emedicine.com/plastic/topic477.htm [Accessed 5 January 2007]

  25. Pollio F., Staibano S., Mascolo M., Salvatore G., Persico F., De Falco M., Di Lieto A. Uterine dehiscence in term pregnant patients with one previous cesarean delivery: growth factor immunoexpression and collagen content in the scarred lower uterine segment, Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 2006, 194(2), 527–534

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Vikhareva Osser O., Jokubkiene L., Valentin L. High prevalence of defects in Cesarean section scars at transvaginal ultrasound examination, Ultrasound. Obstet. Gynecol., 2009, 34(1), 90–97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Seow K., Huang L., Lin Y., Yan-Sheng Lin M., Tsai Y. Cesarean scar pregnancy: issues in management, Ultrasound. Obstet. Gynecol., 2004, 23, 247–253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Brassard N., Bujold E. (2009), OP15.09: A standardized method of LUS measurement in late pregnancy. Ultrasound. Obstet. Gynecol., 34: 110. doi: 10.1002/uog.6796

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rotas M.A., Haberman S., Levgur M. Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancies: etiology, diagnosis, and management, Obstet. Gynecol., 2006, 107(6), 1373–1381

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ramirez M.M., Gilbert S., Landon M.B., Rouse D.J., Spong C.Y., Varner M.W., Caritis S.N., Wapner R.J., Sorokin Y., Miodovnik M., Carpenter M., Peaceman A.M., O’sullivan M.J., Sibai B.M., Langer O., Thorp J.M., Mercer B.M. Mode of Delivery in Women with Antepartum Fetal Death and Prior Cesarean Delivery, Am. J. Perinatol., 2010, 27(10), 825–830

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Slovak Medical University, Faculty of Medicine, Bratislava, III. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 1st Private Hospital Košice-Šaca Inc., Košice-Šaca, Slovak Republic

    Erik Dosedla

  2. First Faculty of Medicine and General Teaching Hospital, Thrombosis Centre of Institute of Clinical Biochemistry and Laboratory Diagnostics, Charles University, Prague, U Nemocnice 2, 128 08, Praha 2, Czech Republic

    Tomáš Kvasnička

  3. First Faculty of Medicine and General Teaching Hospital, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Charles University, Prague, Apolinarska 18, 128 51, Prague, Czech Republic

    Pavel Calda

Authors
  1. Erik Dosedla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tomáš Kvasnička
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pavel Calda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pavel Calda.

About this article

Cite this article

Dosedla, E., Kvasnička, T. & Calda, P. Ultrasonography of the uterus within 6 weeks following Cesarean section. cent.eur.j.med 7, 235–240 (2012). https://doi.org/10.2478/s11536-011-0134-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s11536-011-0134-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation