Transvaginal Ultrasonographic Assessment of Lower Uterine Segment Thickness and Prediction of Uterine Rupture In Cases of Vaginal Birth After Caesarean Delivery

Mohamed Samir Ibrahim, Yehia A. Wafa, F. El-Omda
{"title":"Transvaginal Ultrasonographic Assessment of Lower Uterine Segment Thickness and Prediction of Uterine Rupture In Cases of Vaginal Birth After Caesarean Delivery","authors":"Mohamed Samir Ibrahim, Yehia A. Wafa, F. El-Omda","doi":"10.58675/2682-339x.1616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background : The rise in elective cesarean section (CSs), which make about one-third of all CS cases, is primarily to blame for the rise in the cesarean birth rate. Objective : To assess the strength of the association between transvaginal ultrasonographic measurement of the lower uterine segment (LUS) in women with prior one CS undergoing a trial of vaginal birth and uterine scar defect at delivery. Patients and methods : A retrospective observational study was conducted at Al-Ahrar Zagazig Teaching Hospital during the period from June 2018 through June 2020. The LUS thickness was measured through transvaginal ultrasonography in 60 gravidas (36 e 40 weeks) with previous one CS undergoing vaginal birth after cesarean, and the scar was evaluated during delivery. Results : Uterine dehiscence was found in four (6.7%) cases. There were no cases of uterine rupture. There was a signi fi cant correlation between the grade of scar and sonographic measurement of LUS thickness using transvaginal ultrasound ( P ¼ 0.001). The scar thickness in the third trimester (36 e 40 weeks) had a signi fi cant relation with the mode of delivery. LUS thickness of 2.4 mm was considered the critical cutoff value, above which safe vaginal delivery could be achieved. This critical cutoff value was derived from the receiver-operator characteristic curve with sensitivity, speci-fi city, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 75.0, 85.7, 27.3, and 98.0%, respectively. Conclusion : Measurement of the LUS thickness by transvaginal ultrasonographic seems to be a good screening test with its obviously high sensitivity and negative predictive values. LUS thickness of less than 2.4 mm is associated with a higher risk of uterine defect.","PeriodicalId":256725,"journal":{"name":"Al-Azhar International Medical Journal","volume":"147 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Al-Azhar International Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58675/2682-339x.1616","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background : The rise in elective cesarean section (CSs), which make about one-third of all CS cases, is primarily to blame for the rise in the cesarean birth rate. Objective : To assess the strength of the association between transvaginal ultrasonographic measurement of the lower uterine segment (LUS) in women with prior one CS undergoing a trial of vaginal birth and uterine scar defect at delivery. Patients and methods : A retrospective observational study was conducted at Al-Ahrar Zagazig Teaching Hospital during the period from June 2018 through June 2020. The LUS thickness was measured through transvaginal ultrasonography in 60 gravidas (36 e 40 weeks) with previous one CS undergoing vaginal birth after cesarean, and the scar was evaluated during delivery. Results : Uterine dehiscence was found in four (6.7%) cases. There were no cases of uterine rupture. There was a signi fi cant correlation between the grade of scar and sonographic measurement of LUS thickness using transvaginal ultrasound ( P ¼ 0.001). The scar thickness in the third trimester (36 e 40 weeks) had a signi fi cant relation with the mode of delivery. LUS thickness of 2.4 mm was considered the critical cutoff value, above which safe vaginal delivery could be achieved. This critical cutoff value was derived from the receiver-operator characteristic curve with sensitivity, speci-fi city, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 75.0, 85.7, 27.3, and 98.0%, respectively. Conclusion : Measurement of the LUS thickness by transvaginal ultrasonographic seems to be a good screening test with its obviously high sensitivity and negative predictive values. LUS thickness of less than 2.4 mm is associated with a higher risk of uterine defect.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经阴道超声评价剖宫产后阴道分娩子宫下段厚度及预测子宫破裂
背景:择期剖宫产(CSs)的增加是导致剖宫产率上升的主要原因,约占所有剖宫产病例的三分之一。目的:探讨经阴道超声测量有阴道分娩史的女性子宫下段(LUS)与分娩时子宫瘢痕缺损的相关性。患者和方法:2018年6月至2020年6月在Al-Ahrar Zagazig教学医院进行了一项回顾性观察性研究。对60例(36 ~ 40周)既往1例CS孕妇剖宫产后阴道分娩,经阴道超声测量LUS厚度,并在分娩时评估瘢痕。结果:子宫开裂4例(6.7%)。无子宫破裂病例。瘢痕的分级与经阴道超声测量的LUS厚度之间存在显著的相关性(P < 0.001)。妊娠晚期(36 ~ 40周)瘢痕厚度与分娩方式无显著相关性。LUS厚度2.4 mm被认为是临界临界值,超过这个临界值阴道分娩是安全的。该临界临界值来自患者-操作者特征曲线,其灵敏度、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值分别为75.0、85.7、27.3和98.0%。结论:经阴道超声测量LUS厚度具有明显的高灵敏度和阴性预测值,是一种很好的筛查方法。LUS厚度小于2.4 mm与子宫缺损的高风险相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Correlation Between Left Ventricular Structural and Functional Changes and Coronary Artery Disease in Hypertensive Patients (Speckle Tracking Echocardiographic Study) Evaluation of the prognostic value of Rectus Abdominis muscle thickness and Rectus Femoris muscle thickness guided by ultrasound in intensive care patients. Observational study Incidence of Postprocedural Microembolic Events Following Carotid Artery Stenting without Protection Devices Short-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic-assisted Anterior Perineal PlanE for Ultra-Low Anterior Resection (APPEAR) for Low Rectal Cancer: A Single Center Experience Open Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy for Treatment of Varus Knee in Adults Combined With Arthroscopic Evaluation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1