Literature DB >> 23576473

Sonographic measurement of lower uterine segment thickness to predict uterine rupture during a trial of labor in women with previous Cesarean section: a meta-analysis.

N Kok1, I C Wiersma, B C Opmeer, I M de Graaf, B W Mol, E Pajkrt.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of antenatal sonographic measurement of lower uterine segment (LUS) thickness in the prediction of risk of uterine rupture during a trial of labor (TOL) in women with a previous Cesarean section (CS).
METHODS: PubMed and EMBASE were searched to identify articles published on the subject of sonographic LUS measurement and occurrence of a uterine defect after delivery. Four independent researchers performed identification of papers and data extraction. Selected studies were scored on methodological quality, and sensitivity and specificity of measurement of LUS thickness in the prediction of a uterine defect were calculated. We performed bivariate meta-analysis to estimate summary receiver-operating characteristics (sROC) curves.
RESULTS: We included 21 studies with a total of 2776 analyzed patients. The quality of included studies was good, although comparison was difficult because of heterogeneity. The estimated sROC curves showed that measurement of LUS thickness seems promising in the prediction of occurrence of uterine defects (dehiscence and rupture) in the uterine wall. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of myometrial LUS thickness for cut-offs between 0.6 and 2.0 mm was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.60-0.87) and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.82-0.97); cut-offs between 2.1 and 4.0 mm reached a sensitivity and specificity of 0.94 (95% CI, 0.81-0.98) and 0.64 (95% CI, 0.26-0.90). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of full LUS thickness for cut-offs between 2.0 and 3.0 mm was 0.61 (95% CI, 0.42-0.77) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.80-0.96); cut-offs between 3.1 and 5.1 mm reached a sensitivity and specificity of 0.96 (95% CI, 0.89-0.98) and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.30-0.87).
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides support for the use of antenatal LUS measurements in the prediction of a uterine defect during TOL. Clinical applicability should be assessed in prospective observational studies using a standardized method of measurement.
Copyright © 2013 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Caesarean section; lower uterine segment; sonography; trial of labor; uterine rupture

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23576473     DOI: 10.1002/uog.12479

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0960-7692            Impact factor:   7.299


  21 in total

1.  Age-related changes in thickness of anterior lower uterine segment in normal singleton pregnancy during 20-35 weeks' gestation.

Authors:  Toshiyuki Yoshizato; Ibuki Kimura; Ryota Araki; Ayako Sanui; Fusanori Yotsumoto; Shingo Miyamoto
Journal:  J Med Ultrason (2001)       Date:  2016-03-26       Impact factor: 1.314

2.  Outcome of Induction of Labor with Foley's Catheter in Women with Previous One Cesarean Section with Unfavorable Cervix: An Experience From a Tertiary Care Institute in South India.

Authors:  Venkata A RamyaMohana; Gowri Dorairajan
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2021-03-24

3.  Evaluation of uterine scar healing by transvaginal ultrasound in 607 nonpregnant women with a history of cesarean section.

Authors:  Xingchen Zhou; Tao Zhang; Huayuan Qiao; Yi Zhang; Xipeng Wang
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 2.809

4.  Silent Spontaneous Uterine Rupture at 36 Weeks of Gestation.

Authors:  J Y Woo; L Tate; S Roth; A C Eke
Journal:  Case Rep Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2015-08-19

5.  Prediction of uterine dehiscence using ultrasonographic parameters of cesarean section scar in the nonpregnant uterus: a prospective observational study.

Authors:  Michal Pomorski; Tomasz Fuchs; Mariusz Zimmer
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2014-10-29       Impact factor: 3.007

6.  Treatment and repair of uterine scar dehiscence during cesarean section.

Authors:  Masaaki Sawada; Shinya Matsuzaki; Ruriko Nakae; Tadashi Iwamiya; Aiko Kakigano; Keiichi Kumasawa; Yutaka Ueda; Masayuki Endo; Tadashi Kimura
Journal:  Clin Case Rep       Date:  2017-01-19

7.  Cesarean section scar dehiscence during pregnancy: Case reports.

Authors:  Ibrahim A Abdelazim; Svetlana Shikanova; Sakiyeva Kanshaiym; Bakyt Karimova; Mukhit Sarsembayev; Tatyana Starchenko
Journal:  J Family Med Prim Care       Date:  2018 Nov-Dec

8.  The INTEGRITY Trial: Preservation of Uterine-Wall Integrity 12 Months After Transcervical Fibroid Ablation with the Sonata System.

Authors:  Marlies Bongers; Janesh Gupta; José Gerardo Garza-Leal; Matthew Brown; Ricardo Felberbaum
Journal:  J Gynecol Surg       Date:  2019-10-04

9.  Comparison of the lower uterine segment in pregnant women with and without previous cesarean section in 3 T MRI.

Authors:  Janine Hoffmann; Marc Exner; Kristina Bremicker; Matthias Grothoff; Patrick Stumpp; Holger Stepan
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2019-05-08       Impact factor: 3.007

10.  A prospective study of a new prediction model of vaginal birth after cesarean section at a tertiary care centre.

Authors:  Pinkey Lakra; Bhagyashri Patil; Sunita Siwach; Manisha Upadhyay; Shivani Shivani; Vijayata Sangwan; Rajiv Mahendru
Journal:  Turk J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-12-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.