R Kamel1, T Eissa1, M Sharaf1, S Negm1, B Thilaganathan2,3. 1. Maternal-Fetal Medicine Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cairo University, Kasr Al-Ainy University Hospital, Egypt. 2. Fetal Medicine Unit, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, University of London, London, UK. 3. Vascular Biology Research Centre, Molecular and Clinical Sciences Research Institute, St George's University of London, London, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Abnormal placental invasion is more common after an elective Cesarean delivery, suggesting that prelabor Cesarean section (CS) increases the likelihood of the CS scar being above the internal cervical os and predisposing to a scar pregnancy in the future. The aim of this study was to assess the location and integrity of the CS scar in postpartum women delivered by CS at different stages of labor. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of women at term who underwent a CS for the first time. In all women, cervical dilatation was determined by digital examination at the time of the CS. All patients had a transvaginal ultrasound examination to assess the location of the CS scar in relation to the internal cervical os, as well as the presence of a scar niche. RESULTS: A total of 407 pregnant women were recruited into the study: 103 with cervical dilatation ≤ 2 cm, 261 with cervical dilatation 3-7 cm and 43 with cervical dilatation ≥ 8 cm at the time of the CS. A statistically significant correlation was observed between cervical dilatation at the time of the CS and the position of the CS scar. The scar was positioned in the uterus above the internal cervical os in 97.1% (100/103) of women delivered at a cervical dilatation of 0-2 cm, whereas the scar was located at or below the internal cervical os in 97.7% (42/43) of cases delivered at a cervical dilatation of 8-10 cm (P < 0.001). A uterine-scar defect (niche) was observed in 38.1% (64/168) of women with the scar located above, compared with 18.0% (43/239) of those with the scar situated at or below, the internal cervical os (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Prelabor and early-labor Cesarean delivery are associated with an increased prevalence of a scar in the uterine cavity as well as a scar niche. CS in late labor is associated with the uterine scar being situated in the endocervical canal and with a lower incidence of a niche. The position and integrity of the CS scar after prelabor and early-labor Cesarean delivery explain the predisposition to abnormal placental invasion in subsequent pregnancy.
OBJECTIVE: Abnormal placental invasion is more common after an elective Cesarean delivery, suggesting that prelabor Cesarean section (CS) increases the likelihood of the CS scar being above the internal cervical os and predisposing to a scar pregnancy in the future. The aim of this study was to assess the location and integrity of the CS scar in postpartum women delivered by CS at different stages of labor. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of women at term who underwent a CS for the first time. In all women, cervical dilatation was determined by digital examination at the time of the CS. All patients had a transvaginal ultrasound examination to assess the location of the CS scar in relation to the internal cervical os, as well as the presence of a scar niche. RESULTS: A total of 407 pregnant women were recruited into the study: 103 with cervical dilatation ≤ 2 cm, 261 with cervical dilatation 3-7 cm and 43 with cervical dilatation ≥ 8 cm at the time of the CS. A statistically significant correlation was observed between cervical dilatation at the time of the CS and the position of the CS scar. The scar was positioned in the uterus above the internal cervical os in 97.1% (100/103) of women delivered at a cervical dilatation of 0-2 cm, whereas the scar was located at or below the internal cervical os in 97.7% (42/43) of cases delivered at a cervical dilatation of 8-10 cm (P < 0.001). A uterine-scar defect (niche) was observed in 38.1% (64/168) of women with the scar located above, compared with 18.0% (43/239) of those with the scar situated at or below, the internal cervical os (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Prelabor and early-labor Cesarean delivery are associated with an increased prevalence of a scar in the uterine cavity as well as a scar niche. CS in late labor is associated with the uterine scar being situated in the endocervical canal and with a lower incidence of a niche. The position and integrity of the CS scar after prelabor and early-labor Cesarean delivery explain the predisposition to abnormal placental invasion in subsequent pregnancy.