Accidental uterine extensions in cesarean deliveries - outcome of subsequent pregnancy.

accidental uterine extensions cesarean delivery trial of labor after cesarean uterine rupture

Journal

Journal of perinatal medicine
ISSN: 1619-3997
Titre abrégé: J Perinat Med
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0361031

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
27 Jun 2024
Historique:
received: 27 02 2024
accepted: 16 06 2024
medline: 26 6 2024
pubmed: 26 6 2024
entrez: 26 6 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

To explore the obstetric, maternal and neonatal outcome in the subsequent pregnancy after a pregnancy with an accidental uterine extension (AUE) during cesarean delivery (CD), as well as the relationship between the different types of AUE (inferior, lateral and superior). A retrospective cohort study of all CD with AUE in a tertiary medical center between 01/2011-01/2022. Women with a prior CD with AUE were compared to a 1:3 ratio matched control group of women with a prior CD without AUE. All AUE were defined in their direction, size and mode of suturing. CD with deliberate uterine extensions were excluded. We evaluated obstetric, maternal and neonatal outcomes in the subsequent pregnancy after a pregnancy with AUE during CD. Comparing women with a prior CD with AUE (n=177) to the matched control group of women with a prior CD without AUE (n=528), we found no significant differences in proportions of uterine rupture or any other major complication or adverse outcome between the groups. There were no significant differences in the outcomes of the subsequent pregnancy in relation to the characteristics of the AUE (direction, size and mode of suturing). Subsequent pregnancies after AUE are not associated with higher maternal or neonatal adverse outcomes including higher proportions of uterine rupture compared to pregnancies without previous AUE. Different characteristics of the AUE do not impact the outcome.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38924767
pii: jpm-2024-0077
doi: 10.1515/jpm-2024-0077
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.

Références

Asıcıoglu, O, Gungorduk, K, Asıcıoglu, BB, Yıldırım, G, Gungorduk, OC, Ark, C. Unintended extension of the lower segment uterine incision at cesarean delivery: a randomized comparison of sharp versus blunt techniques. Am J Perinatol 2014;31:837–44. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1361934 .
doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1361934
Martin, JA, Hamilton, BE, Osterman, MJK, Driscoll, AK, Drake, P. Births: final data for 2016. In: National vital statistics reports . Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2018, vol LXVII.
Hammad, IA, Chauhan, SP, Magann, EF, Abuhamad, AZ. Peripartum complications with cesarean delivery: a review of Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network publications. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2014;27:463–74. https://doi.org/10.3109/14767058.2013.818970 .
doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.818970
Patel, SS, Koelper, NC, Srinivas, SK, Sammel, MD, Levine, LD. Adverse maternal outcomes associated with uterine extensions at the time of cesarean delivery. Am J Perinatol 2019;36:785–9. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1676827 .
doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1676827
de la Torre, L, González-Quintero, VH, Mayor-Lynn, K, Smarkusky, L, Hoffman, MC, Saab, A, et al.. Significance of accidental extensions in the lower uterine segment during cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006;194:e4–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2006.01.026 .
doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2006.01.026
Giugale, LE, Sakamoto, S, Yabes, J, Dunn, SL, Krans, EE. Unintended hysterotomy extension during caesarean delivery: risk factors and maternal morbidity. J Obstet Gynaecol 2018;38:1048–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443615.2018.1446421 .
doi: 10.1080/01443615.2018.1446421
Wilkie, G, Shipp, TD, Little, SE, Fadayomi, A, Carusi, DA. Hysterotomy extension at cesarean delivery and future uterine rupture. Obstet Gynecol 2021;137:271–272. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000004234 .
doi: 10.1097/aog.0000000000004234
Goldfarb, I. Inadvertent hysterotomy extension at cesarean delivery and risk of uterine rupture in the next pregnancy; 2011. Available from: https://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378(10)01952-6/fulltext#%20 .
Peled, T, Ashwal, E, Rotem, R, Sela, HY, Grisaru Granovsky, S, Rottenstreich, M. Unintended lower-segment hysterotomy extension at cesarean delivery and the risk for uterine rupture during a subsequent trial of labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2023;162:957–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.14785 .
doi: 10.1002/ijgo.14785
Landon, MB, Hauth, JC, Leveno, KJ, Spong, CY, Leindecker, S, Varner, MW, et al.. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med 2004;351:2581–9. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa040405 .
doi: 10.1056/nejmoa040405
Karavani, G, Chill, HH, Reuveni-Salzman, A, Guedalia, J, Ben Menahem-Zidon, O, Cohen, N, et al.. Risk factors for uterine incision extension during cesarean delivery. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2022;35:2156–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2020.1783230 .
doi: 10.1080/14767058.2020.1783230
Carpenter, MW, Coustan, DR. Criteria for screening tests for gestational diabetes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1982;144:768–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(82)90349-0 .
doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(82)90349-0
Committee on Obstetric Practice, A.e.C.o.O.a.G . ACOG Committee Opinion. Number 326, December 2005. Inappropriate use of the terms fetal distress and birth asphyxia. Obstet Gynecol 2005;106:1469–70. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006250-200512000-00056 .
doi: 10.1097/00006250-200512000-00056
Shah, PS, Beyene, J, To, T, Ohlsson, A, Perlman, M. Postasphyxial hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy in neonates: outcome prediction rule within 4 hours of birth. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2006;160:729–36. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.160.7.729 .
doi: 10.1001/archpedi.160.7.729
Krenke, R, Grabczak, EM. Pleural manometry and thoracentesis-is the issue resolved? Lancet Respir Med 2019;7:374–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2213-2600(19)30033-5 .
doi: 10.1016/s2213-2600(19)30033-5
Wang, S, Gu, J. The effect of prophylactic bilateral salpingectomy on ovarian reserve in patients who underwent laparoscopic hysterectomy. J Ovarian Res 2021;14:86. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-021-00825-w .
doi: 10.1186/s13048-021-00825-w

Auteurs

Shlomi Toussia-Cohen (S)

The Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 26744 Chaim Sheba Medical Center , Ramat-Gan, Israel.
The Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Aviran Ohayon (A)

The Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 26744 Chaim Sheba Medical Center , Ramat-Gan, Israel.
The Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Hila Lahav-Ezra (H)

The Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 26744 Chaim Sheba Medical Center , Ramat-Gan, Israel.
The Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Michal Axelrod (M)

The Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 26744 Chaim Sheba Medical Center , Ramat-Gan, Israel.
The Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Daphna Amitai Komem (D)

The Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 26744 Chaim Sheba Medical Center , Ramat-Gan, Israel.
The Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Gabriel Levin (G)

The Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Hadassah Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel.

Eyal Sivan (E)

The Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 26744 Chaim Sheba Medical Center , Ramat-Gan, Israel.
The Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Raanan Meyer (R)

The Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 26744 Chaim Sheba Medical Center , Ramat-Gan, Israel.
The Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Classifications MeSH