Indicator analysis of hysteroscope electrotomy for previous cesarean scar defect

Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate if transvaginal ultrasonography is an accurate diagnosis method for previous cesarean scar defect (PCSD) and to analyze the indicators of the PCSD patients suitable for undergoing hysteroscope electrotomy treatment. Methods: 25 patients with PCSD related clinical symptoms were selected for this study. The patients were first undergone transvaginal ultrasonography for the diagnosis of PCSD and then confirmed by hysteroscopy. All the patients received hysteroscope electrotomy treatment, and were followed up for 24 months, then the therapeutic efficacy of hysteroscopy electrotomy and the indicators of PCSD patients potentially affecting the outcomes were analyzed. Results: The accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound diagnosis for PCSD was 88%. The overall effective rate of hysteroscopy electrotomy for PCSD was 60%. Compared to the overall effective rate, hysteroscopy electrotomy had a significantly higher effective rate in the patients with single cesarean section (83.3%), or anteverted uterus position (90.9%); in contrast, hysteroscopy electrotomy had a significantly lower effective rate in the patients with multiple cesarean section (38.5%), or retroverted uterus position (35.7%), or with multiple cesarean section plus retroverted uterus position (28.6%). Conclusion: Hysteroscopy electrotomy is an effective treatment for PCSD patients with single cesarean history and anteverted uterus position.

[1]  A. Tower,et al.  Cesarean scar defects: an underrecognized cause of abnormal uterine bleeding and other gynecologic complications. , 2013, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[2]  J. Donnez,et al.  Laparoscopic repair of post-cesarean section uterine scar defects diagnosed in nonpregnant women. , 2013, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[3]  O. Ceci,et al.  Ultrasonographic and hysteroscopic outcomes of uterine scar healing after cesarean section: Comparison of two types of single‐layer suture , 2012, The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research.

[4]  Xiao-qin Liang,et al.  Hysteroscopic treatment of postcesarean scar defect. , 2012, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[5]  Chin-Jung Wang,et al.  Challenges in the transvaginal management of abnormal uterine bleeding secondary to cesarean section scar defect. , 2011, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[6]  E. Tsai,et al.  Resectoscopic treatment combined with sonohysterographic evaluation of women with postmenstrual bleeding as a result of previous cesarean delivery scar defects. , 2009, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[7]  J. Silberzweig,et al.  Cesarean section scar diverticulum: appearance on hysterosalpingography. , 2008, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[8]  J. Donnez,et al.  Laparoscopic repair of wide and deep uterine scar dehiscence after cesarean section. , 2008, Fertility and sterility.

[9]  E. Marra,et al.  Resectoscopic correction of the "isthmocele" in women with postmenstrual abnormal uterine bleeding and secondary infertility. , 2008, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[10]  Takashi Shimizu,et al.  Preliminary report of treatment with oral contraceptive pills for intermenstrual vaginal bleeding secondary to a cesarean section scar. , 2006, Fertility and sterility.

[11]  A. Schneider,et al.  Laparoscopic and vaginal repair of uterine scar dehiscence following cesarean section as detected by ultrasound , 2005, Journal of perinatal medicine.

[12]  S. Salhan,et al.  Ultrasonographic evaluation of lower uterine segment thickness in patients of previous cesarean section , 2004, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

[13]  C. Fernández,et al.  Surgical treatment and follow-up of women with intermenstrual bleeding due to cesarean section scar defect. , 2002, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[14]  F. Goffinet,et al.  Ultrasonographic measurement of lower uterine segment to assess risk of defects of scarred uterus , 1996, The Lancet.