3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Transabdominal versus transvaginal ultrasound to assess the thickness of lower uterine segment at term in women with previous cesarean section

      , ,
      European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references5

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          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.

          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). 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. 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). 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.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Medical and non-medical reasons for cesarean section delivery in Egypt: a hospital-based retrospective study

            Background Caesarean section (CS) is an important lifesaving intervention that can reduce maternal and newborn morbidity and mortality. The dramatic increase in CS rates globally has prompted concerns that the procedure may be overused or used for inappropriate indications. In Egypt, CS rates are alarmingly high, accounting for 52% of all deliveries. This study sought to (1) explore indications and risk factors for CS in public hospitals in four governorates in Egypt and (2) examine health care provider factors impacting the decision to perform a CS. Methods We reviewed medical records for all deliveries that took place during April 2016 in 13 public hospitals situated in four governorates in Egypt (Cairo, Alexandria, Assiut and Behera), and extracted information pertaining to medical indications and women’s obstetric characteristics. We also interviewed obstetricians in the study hospitals to explore factors associated with the decision to perform CS. Results A total of 4357 deliveries took place in the study hospitals during that period. The most common medical indications were previous CS (50%), an “other” category (13%), and fetal distress (9%). Multilevel analysis revealed that several obstetric risk factors were associated with increased odds of CS mode of delivery – including previous CS, older maternal age, and nulliparity – while factors such as partograph completion and oxytocin use were associated with reduced odds of CS. Interviews with obstetricians highlighted non-medical factors implicated in the high CS rates, including a convenience incentive, lack of supervision and training in public hospitals, as well as absence of or lack of familiarity with clinical guidelines. Conclusion A combination of both medical and non-medical factors drives the increase in CS rates. Our analysis however suggests that a substantial number of CS deliveries took place in the absence of strong medical justification. Health care provider factors seem to be powerful factors influencing CS rates in the study hospitals.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Oxytocin use in trial of labor after cesarean and its relationship with risk of uterine rupture in women with one previous cesarean section: a meta-analysis of observational studies

              Background Trial of labor after a previous cesarean delivery (TOLAC) has reduced the rate of cesarean sections (CS). Nevertheless, the widespread use of TOLAC has been limited by an increase in adverse outcomes, the most serious one being the risk of symptomatic uterine rupture, which is possibly associated with oxytocin. In this meta-analysis, we explored the risk association between oxytocin use and uterine rupture in TOLAC. Methods Multiple electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) were searched for cross-sectional studies reporting on TOLAC, oxytocin and uterine rupture, which were published between January 1986 and October 2019. The bias-corrected Hedge’s g was calculated as the effect size using the random-effects model. A two-sample Z test was used to compare the differences in synthetic rates between groups. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the risk of bias. Quality of the evidence was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) certainty ratings system. Results A total of 14 studies, which included 48,457 women who underwent TOLAC, met the inclusion criteria. The pooled rate of vaginal birth after a cesarean section (VBAC) and the rate of uterine rupture in spontaneous labor were 74.3 and 0.7%, respectively. In addition, the pooled rate of VBAC and the rate of uterine rupture in the induction labor group was 60.7 and 2.2%, respectively. The women who had spontaneous labor had a significantly higher rate of VBAC (p = 0.001) and a lower rate of uterine rupture (p = 0.0003) compared to induced labor. The pooled rates of uterine rupture in women using oxytocin and women not using oxytocin in TOLAC were 1.4% and 0.5%, respectively, and the difference was significant (p = 0.0002). Also, the synthetic rate of uterine rupture in oxytocin augmentation among women with spontaneous labor and women who had a successful induction of labor were 1.7% and 2.2%, respectively, without significant difference (p = 0.443). Conclusions Women with induced labor had a higher risk of uterine rupture compared to women with spontaneous labor following TOLAC. Oxytocin use may increase this risk, which could be influenced by the process of induction or individual cervix condition. Consequently, simplified and standardized intrapartum management, precise protocol, and cautious monitoring of oxytocin use in TOLAC are necessary. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-020-03440-7.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
                European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
                Elsevier BV
                03012115
                April 2022
                April 2022
                : 271
                : 145-151
                Article
                10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.01.027
                35203047
                97c9ef3e-e837-42a0-8c14-5eec9f904281
                © 2022

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article