LARGE ISTHMOCELE AFTER CROSS-SECTION (CLINICAL CASE)

Main Article Content

Марина Анатольевна Ющенко
Татьяна Владимировна Ананьева
Ольга Сергеевна Золоторевская
Светлана Ивановна Елгина
Елена Владимировна Рудаева
Кира Борисовна Мозес
Вадим Гельевич Мозес
Наталья Степановна Черных

Abstract

Cesarean section is one of the most common obstetric operations. Over the past few decades, the caesarean section rate in Russia has more than doubled and is about 24 %. In this regard, the issue of the viability of the scar on the uterus after cesarean section, the effect of the scar condition on the course of subsequent pregnancies and childbirth is particularly relevant.
The presented article describes a rare clinical case of large-sized isthmocele in a patient after three cesarean sections, taking into account the pronounced anatomical and morphological changes, organ-preserving surgery (metroplasty) in the patient was impossible due to and associated with an unfavorable prognosis of pregnancy in the future in terms of complete insolvency of the postoperative scar.

Keywords

isthmocele, cesarean section, failure of the scar

Author Biographies

Марина Анатольевна Ющенко,

head of the gynecological department

Татьяна Владимировна Ананьева,

doctor of the gynecological department

Ольга Сергеевна Золоторевская,

obstetrician-gynecologist

Светлана Ивановна Елгина,

doctor of medical sciences, docent, professor of the department of obstetrics and gynecology named after G.A. Ushakova

Елена Владимировна Рудаева,

candidate of medical sciences, docent, docent of the department of obstetrics and gynecology named after G.A. Ushakova

Кира Борисовна Мозес,

assistant, department of polyclinic therapy and nursing

Вадим Гельевич Мозес,

doctor of medical sciences, professor, director of the medical institute

Наталья Степановна Черных,

candidate of medical sciences, docent, docent of the department of polyclinic pediatrics, propaedeutics of childhood diseases and postgraduate training

Article Details

Information about financing and conflict of interests

The study had no sponsorship.
The authors declare that they have no apparent or potential conflicts of interest related to the publication of this article.

How to Cite

Ющенко, М. А., Ананьева, Т. В., Золоторевская, О. С., Елгина, С. И., Рудаева, Е. В., Мозес, К. Б., Мозес, В. Г., & Черных, Н. С. (2024). LARGE ISTHMOCELE AFTER CROSS-SECTION (CLINICAL CASE). Mother and Baby in Kuzbass, 25(2), 135-140. https://doi.org/10.24412/2686-7338-2024-2-135-140

References

Kulshrestha V, Agarwal N, Kachhawa G. Post-caesarean Niche (Isthmocele) in Uterine Scar: An Update. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2020; 70(6): 440-446. doi: 10.1007/s13224-020-01370-0

Sukhoi GT, Kogan EA, Kesova MI, Demura TA, Donnikov AE, Martynov AI, et al. Morphological and molecular genetic features of neoangiogenesis in scar tissue in patients with undifferentiated connective tissue dysplasia. Obstetrics and gynecology. 2010; (6): 23-28. Russian (Сухих Г.Т., Коган Е.А., Кесова М.И., Демура Т.А., Донников А.Е., Мартынов А.И. и др. Морфологические и молекулярно-генетические особенности неоангиогенеза в рубцовой ткани у пациенток с недифференцированной дисплазией соединительной ткани //Акушерство и гинекология. 2010. № 6. С. 23-28)

Sukhoi GT, Donnikov AE, Kesova MI, Kan NE, Amiraslanov EYu, Klimantsev IV, et al. Assessment of the condition of the uterine scar using mathematical modeling based on clinical and molecular genetic predictors. Obstetrics and gynecology. 2013; (1): 33–40. Russian (Сухих Г.Т., Донников А.Е., Кесова М.И., Кан Н.Е., Амирасланов Э.Ю., Климанцев И.В. и др. Оценка состояния рубца матки с помощью математического моделирования на основании клинических и молекулярно-генетических предикторов //Акушерство и гинекология. 2013. № 1. С. 33-40)

Gulz M, Imboden S, Nirgianakis K, Siegenthaler F, Rau TT, Mueller MD. Endometriosis and isthmocele: common or rare? J Clin Med. 2022; 11(5): 1158. doi: 10.3390/jcm11051158

Al Naimi A, Wolnicki B, Mouzakiti N, Reinbach T, Louwen F, Bahlmann F. Anatomy of the sonographic post-cesarean uterus. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2021; 304(6):1485-1491. doi: 10.1007/s00404-021-06074-y

Bamberg C, Hinkson L, Dudenhausen JW, Bujak V, Kalache KD, Henrich W. Longitudinal transvaginal ultrasound evaluation of cesarean scar niche incidence and depth in the first two years after single- or double-layer uterotomy closure: a randomized controlled trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017; 96(12): 1484-1489. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13213

Budny-Winska J, Zimmer-Stelmach A, Pomorski M. Two- and three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound in assessment of the impact of selected obstetric risk factors on cesarean scar niche formation: the case-controlled study. Ginekol Pol. 2021; 92(5): 378-382. doi: 10.5603/GP.a2021.0024

Demography and reproductive health of the female population of Kuzbass. Ushakova GA, Elgina SI, Surkov NI. Kemerovo, 1997. Russian (Демография и репродуктивное здоровье женского населения Кузбасса. Ушакова Г.А., Елгина С.И., Сурков Н.И. Кемерово, 1997)

Antila-Långsjö R, Mäenpää JU, Huhtala H, Tomás E, Staff S. Comparison of transvaginal ultrasound and saline contrast sonohysterography in evaluation of cesarean scar defect: a prospective cohort study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2018; 97(9): 1130-1136. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13367

Yılmaz Baran Ş, Kalaycı H, Doğan Durdağ G, Yetkinel S, Alemdaroğlu S, Çok T, Bulgan Kılıçdağ E. Single- or double-layer uterine closure techniques following cesarean: A randomized trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2021; 100(3): 531-537. doi: 10.1111/aogs.14018

Stegwee SI, van der Voet LF, Ben AJ, de Leeuw RA, van de Ven PM, Duijnhoven RG, et al. Effect of single- versus double-layer uterine closure during caesarean section on postmenstrual spotting (2Close): multicentre, double-blind, randomized controlled superiority trial. BJOG. 2021; 128(5): 866-878. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.16472

Di Spiezio Sardo A, Saccone G, McCurdy R, Bujold E, Bifulco G, Berghella V. Risk of cesarean scar defect following single- vs double-layer uterine closure: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 50(5): 578-583. doi: 10.1002/uog.17401

Erkayiran U, Arslanca T. Comparative analysis of classical primary continuous and novel technique uterine suturing methods on uterine scar formation after caesarean section: a prospective clinical study. Ginekol Pol. 2022; 93(7): 552-557. doi: 10.5603/GP.a2022.0022

Pomorski M, Fuchs T, Rosner-Tenerowicz A, Zimmer M. Morphology of the cesarean section scar in the non-pregnant uterus after one elective cesarean section. Ginekol Pol. 2017; 88(4): 174-179. doi: 10.5603/GP.a2017.0034

Marchand GJ, Masoud A, King A, Ruther S, Brazil G, Ulibarri H, et al. Effect of single- and double-layer cesarean section closure on residual myometrial thickness and isthmocele – a systematic review and meta-analysis. Turk J Obstet Gynecol. 2021; 18(4): 322-332. doi: 10.4274/tjod.galenos.2021.71173

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >>