Startseite Laparoscopic and vaginal repair of uterine scar dehiscence following cesarean section as detected by ultrasound
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Laparoscopic and vaginal repair of uterine scar dehiscence following cesarean section as detected by ultrasound

  • Petra Klemm , Christhardt Koehler , Mandy Mangler , Uwe Schneider und Achim Schneider
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 1. Juli 2005

Abstract

Introduction and Objective: Cesarean section (CS) is the most common operation in obstetrics, with rising incidence in most countries. As a result of this operation late scar dehiscence may occur, which may lead to uterine rupture in a subsequent pregnancy. In this case series we have described sonographic detection of scar dehiscence after CS and feasibility of vaginal or combined laparoscopic and vaginal scar excision and uterine repair.

Methods: Five consecutive patients underwent vaginal or laparoscopic assisted vaginal approach for repair of suspected scar dehiscence following CS, during a 5 year period. In all cases, transvaginal sonography detected suspicious features of scar dehiscence over the anterior uterine wall. Except of one, all patients had reported recurrent pelvic pain and/or irregular menstrual bleedings. Furthermore all patients planned for a further pregnancy.

Results: Resection of the uterine defect and re-constitution of the uterine wall was successfully achieved in all five patients. There were no intra-operative complications and none of the patients required blood transfusion. The mean operation time was 117 min (27–192). Presence of scar tissue was confirmed on histology in all specimens. Four patients remained free of symptoms with no evidence of recurrent scar dehiscence on sonography over a median follow up of 30 months (3–46). One patient had an uneventful pregnancy 24 months after scar removal and was delivered by repeat CS at 39 weeks' gestation.

Conclusion: Patients with a history of CS should undergo transvaginal sonography of the scar region in order to detect latent scar dehiscence in combination with uterine wall thinning prior to planning further pregnancy. In suspected cases, a combined laparoscopic – vaginal or vaginal approach can be employed to repair the defect.

:

Corresponding author: Achim Schneider MD, MPH Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin, Department of Gynecology, 12200 Berlin, Germany, Tel.: +49-30-84452591 Fax: +49-30-84454477,

References

1 ACOG: Vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery. Clinical management guidelines 1998Suche in Google Scholar

2 Al–Mufti R, A McCarthy, NM Fisk: Obstetrician's personal choice and mode of delivery. Lancet347(9000) (1996) 544Suche in Google Scholar

3 Armstrong V, WF Hansen, BJ Van Voorhis, CH Syrop: Detection of cesarean Scars by transvaginal ultrasound. Obstet Gynecol101(1) (2003) 61Suche in Google Scholar

4 Bromley B, BL Pitcher, H Klapholz, E Lichter, BR Benacerraf: Sonographic appearance of uterine scar dehiscence. Int J Gynaecol Obstet51(1) (1995) 5310.1016/0020-7292(95)80009-2Suche in Google Scholar

5 Chauhan SP, EF Magann, CD Wiggs, PS Barrilleaux, JN Martin Jr.: Pregnancy after classic cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol100 (2002) 946Suche in Google Scholar

6 Chazotte C, WR Cohen: Catastrophic complications of previous cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol163 (1990) 738Suche in Google Scholar

7 Davey MR, J Moodley, GJ Hofmeyr: Labour after cesarean section – the problem of sacr dehiscence. S Afr Med J71(12) (1987) 766Suche in Google Scholar

8 Diaz SD, JE Jones, M Seryakov, WJ Mann: Uterine rupture and dehiscence: ten-year review and case-control study. South Med J95(4) (2002) 431Suche in Google Scholar

9 Erickson SS, BJ Van Voorhis: Intermenstrual bleeding secondary to cesarean scar diverticuli: report of three cases. Obstet Gynecol93(5) (1999) 802Suche in Google Scholar

10 Fabres C, G Aviles, C Da La Jara, J Escalona, JF Munoz, A Mackenna, C Fernandez, F Zegers-Hochschild, E Fernandez: The cesarean scar pouch: clinical implications and diagnostic correlation between transvaginal sonography and hysteroscopy. J Ultrasound Med22(7) (2003) 695Suche in Google Scholar

11 Farmer RM, T Kirschbaum, D Potter, TH Strong, AL Medearis: Uterine rupture during trial of labor after previous cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol165 (1991) 996Suche in Google Scholar

12 Fasubaa OB, VA Adetiloye, AC Baraletei, AT Owolabi, F Dare: Rupture of uterine scar with extrusion of twin fetuses into the urinary bladder – a case report. West Afr J med20(2) (2001) 158Suche in Google Scholar

13 Fernandez E, C Fernandez, C Fabres, VV Alam: Hystero-scopic correction of cesarean section scars in women with abnormal uterine bleeding. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc3(4, Supplement) (1996) 1310.1016/S1074-3804(96)80170-8Suche in Google Scholar

14 Gregory KD, LM Korst, P Cane, LD Platt, K Kahn: Vaginal birth after cesarean and uterine rupture rates in California. Obstet Gynecol94 (1999) 985Suche in Google Scholar

15 Guise JM, MS McDonagh, P Osterweil, P Nygren, BK Chan, M Helfand: Systematic review of the incidence and consequences of uterine rupture in women with previous cesarean section. BMJ329(7456) (2004) 19Suche in Google Scholar

16 Hall MH: What is the right number of cesarean sections? Lancet349(9064) 155710.1016/S0140-6736(05)62144-7Suche in Google Scholar

17 Hamar BD, D Levine, NL Katz, KH Lim: Expectant management of uterine dehiscence in the second trimester of pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol102 (2003) 1139Suche in Google Scholar

18 Hohlagschwandtner M, K Chalubinski, A Nather, P Husslein, EA Joura: Continuous vs interrupted sutures for single-layer closure of uterine incision at cesarean section. Arch Gynecol Obstet268 (2003) 26Suche in Google Scholar

19 Juzi C, C Rageth: Geburt bei Z.n. Sectio: eine Risikoanalyse. Vergleich des Kollektivs eines Schwerpunktspitals mit 199 Geburten bei Z.n. Sectio mit 9730 Fällen der ASF-Datenbank. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd60 (2000) 345Suche in Google Scholar

20 Kaplan B, M Royburt, Y Peled, M Hirsch, M Hod, Y Ovadia, A Neri: Routine revision of uterine scar after prior cesarean section. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand73(6) (1994) 473Suche in Google Scholar

21 Kindig M, M Cardwell, T Lee: Delayed postpartum uterine dehiscence. A case report. J Reprod Med43 (1998) 591Suche in Google Scholar

22 Lichtenberg ES, MC Frederiksen: Cesarean scar dehiscence as a cause of hemorrhage after second trimester abortion by dilatation and evacuation. Contraception70(1) (2004) 61Suche in Google Scholar

23 Lonky NM, N Worthen, MG Ross: Prediction of cesarean section scars with ultrasound imaging during pregnancy. J Ultrasound Med8 (1989) 15Suche in Google Scholar

24 Maldjian C, B Milestone, M Schnall, R Smith: MR appearance of uterine dehiscence in the post-cesarean section patient. J Comput Assist Tomogr22(5) (1998) 738Suche in Google Scholar

25 Matsuo K, K Shimoya, T Shinkai, H Ohashi, M Koyama, M Yamasaki, Y Murata: Uterine rupture of cesarean scar related to spontaneous abortion in the first trimester. J Obstet Gynaecol Res30(1) (2004) 34Suche in Google Scholar

26 Mc Mahon MJ, ER Luther, WA Bowes, AF Olshan: Comparison of a trial of labour with an elective second cesarean section. N Engl J Med335 (1996) 689Suche in Google Scholar

27 Meehan FP, G Burke, JT Kehoe, IM Magani: True rupture/scar dehiscence in delivery following prior section. Int J Gynaecol Obstet31(3) (1990) 249Suche in Google Scholar

28 Monteagudo A, C Carreno, IE Timor-Tritsch: Saline infusion sonohysterography in nonpregnant women with previous cesarean delivery: the “niche” in the scar. J Ultrasound Med20(10) (2001) 1105Suche in Google Scholar

29 Nielsen TF, U Ljungblad, H Hagberg: Rupture and dehiscence of cesarean section scar during pregnancy and delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol160(3) (1989) 569Suche in Google Scholar

30 Notzon FC, PJ Placek, SM Taffel: Comparison of national cesarean-section rates. N Engl J Med316(7) (1987) 386Suche in Google Scholar

31 Ofir K, E Sheiner, A Levy, M Katz, M Mazor: Uterine rupture: risk factors and pregnancy outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol189(4) (2003) 1042Suche in Google Scholar

32 Ofir K, E Sheiner, A Levy, M Katz, M Mazor: Uterine rupture: differences between a scarred and an unscarred uterus. Am J Obstet Gynecol191(2) (2004) 425Suche in Google Scholar

33 Paterson-Brown S, NM Fisk: Cesarean section – every woman's right to choose?Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol9 (1998) 351Suche in Google Scholar

34 Plaut MM, ML Schwartz, SL Lubarsky: Uterine rupture associated with the use of misoprostol in the gravid patient with a previous cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol180(6) (1999) 1535Suche in Google Scholar

35 Porter M, S Bhattacharya, E van Teijlingen, A Templeton: Reproductive outcome following cesarean section (ROCS) collaborative group. Does cesarean section cause infertility?Hum Reprod18(10) (2003) 1983Suche in Google Scholar

36 Pridjian G: Labor after prior cesarean section. Clin Obstet Gynecol35 (1992) 44510.1097/00003081-199209000-00004Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

37 Rageth JC, C Juzi, H Grossenbacher: Delivery after previous cesarean: a risk evaluation. Swiss Working Group of Obstetric and Gynecologic Institutions. Obstet Gynecol93(3) (1999) 332Suche in Google Scholar

38 Regnard C, M Nosbusch, C Fellemans, N Benali, M van Rysselberghe, P Barlow, S Rozenberg: Cesarean section scar evaluation by saline contrast sonohysterography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol23(3) (2004) 289Suche in Google Scholar

39 Rivlin ME, CS Caroll Sr, JC Morrison: Uterine incisional necrosis complicating cesarean section. J Reprod Med48 (2003) 687Suche in Google Scholar

40 Rivlin ME, CS Carroll, JC Morrison: Conservative surgery for uterine incisional necrosis complicating cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol103(5) (2004) 1105Suche in Google Scholar

41 Rozenberg P, F Goffinet, HJ Philippe, I Nisand: Echographic measurement of the inferior uterine segment for assessing the risk of uterine rupture. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris)26(5) (1997) 513Suche in Google Scholar

42 Rozenberg P, F Goffinet, HJ Philippe, I Nisand: Thickness of the lower uterine segment: its influence in the management of patients with previous cesarean sections. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol87(1) (1999) 39Suche in Google Scholar

43 Shipp TD, CM Zelop, JT Repke, A Cohen, AB Caughey, E Lieberman: Intrapartum uterine rupture and dehiscence in patients with prior lower uterine segment vertical and transverse incisions. Obstet Gynecol94 (1999) 735Suche in Google Scholar

44 Suzuki S, R Sawa, Y Yoneyama, H Asakura, T Araki: Preoperative diagnosis of dehiscence of the lower uterine segment in patients with a single previous cesarean section. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol40(4) (2000) 402Suche in Google Scholar

45 Tahilramaney MP, M Boucher, GS Eglinton, M Beall, JP Phelan: Previous cesarean section and trial of labor. Factors related to risk of uterine dehiscence. J Reprod Med29 (1984) 17Suche in Google Scholar

46 Thurmond AS, WJ Harvey, SA Smith: Cesarean section scar as a cause of abnormal vaginal bleeding diagnosis by sonohysterography. J Ultrasound Med18(1) (1999) 13Suche in Google Scholar

47 Van Horenbeeck A, M Temmerman, M Dhont: Cesarean scar dehiscence and irregular uterine bleeding. Obstet Gynecol102(5) (2003) 1137Suche in Google Scholar

48 Wang PH, CC Yuan, HT Chao, MJ Yang, HT Ng: Posterior uterine wall rupture during labour. Hum Reprod15(5) (2000) 1198Suche in Google Scholar

49 Zelop CM, TD Shipp, JT Repke, A Cohen, AB Caughey, Liebermann E: Uterine rupture during induced or augmented labour in women with one prior cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol181 (1999) 882Suche in Google Scholar

50 Zimmer EZ, R Bardin, A Tamir, M Bronshtein: Sonographic imaging of cervical scars after cesarean section. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol23(6) (2004) 594Suche in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2005-07-01
Published in Print: 2005-07-01

© Walter de Gruyter

Heruntergeladen am 7.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/JPM.2005.058/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen