Abstract
Aim: To evaluate the efficacy of Transvaginal Sonography (TVS) to measure the thickness of scarred Lower Uterine Segment (LUS) in antenatal women at term and it association with obstetrical outcome.
Methods: This prospective study included 100 antenatal women with previous caesarean at term in study group and 100 antenatal women without H/O any uterine surgery of same profile in control group. LUS was scanned using TVS. All women were followed till delivery & further divided unto 2 groups for mode of delivery.
Results: Out of the total 100 antenatal women in study group 28 were kept for repeat elective caesarean for repeat indications for C.S. Rest 72% women underwent trial of labour with continuous maternal and fetal monitoring. Out of 72 women kept for TOL, 26 had emergency caesarean and 46 had successful VBAC. At a cut off value of scar thickness 2.5mm, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value was 80.6%, 83%, 70% and 90.3% respectively. It suggested that if the thickness of LUS was 2.5 mm or more, chances of vaginal delivery following trial of labour was high.
Conclusion: Antenatal ultrasonographic (2D/3D) assessment of LUS thickness near term can result a successful trial of labour is women with previous caesarean section.
Keywords: Transvaginal Sonography, Lower uterine segment, caesarean section scar, vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC).
References
- Radhakrishanan T, Vasant kumara KP, Bahu PK , Increasing trend of cesarean section rate in India: Evidence from NFHS – 4. Journal of Medical science and clinical Research 5(8) pg26167-26176 Aug 2017
- Lunmbiganon P, Lacfaiboon M, Gulnejogji AM et al, Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia: The WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health. The Lancet 2010 vol 375no 9713 pg 490-499
- Lydon-Rochelle M, Hlolt VL, Easterling TR, Martin DP, Risk of uterine rupture during labour among wmen with a prior caesarean delivery. N eng J Mel 2001; 345: 3-8.
- Jones RO, Nagashima AW, Hatnetl-Goodman MM, Goodlin RC. Rupture of low transvers caesarean scars during trial of labour. Obstet Gynecol 1991; 77:815-7.
- Leung As, Leung EK, Paul RH. Uterine rupture after previous caesarean delivery; Maternal and fetal consequences. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993; 169: 945-50.
- Abdel Baset F Mohammed, Diaa A. Al-Mog’hazi, Mamdouh T. Hamdy, Enas M. Mohammed. Ultrasonographic evaluation of lower uterine segment thickness in pregnant women with previous caesarean section. Middle East Fertility Society Journal 2010; 15: 188 – 193.
- Verma U., Chandra M, Nagrath A et al: Assessment of cesarean section scar strength: Still a challenge. Indian Journal of Clinical Practice March 2014, 24(10); 974-977.
- Neelu Soni, Sumita Dhegle. Assessent of lower uterine segment caesarean scar by ultrasonography and its clinical correlation. Arian Journal of Obs & Gynae Practice 2010; 1: 8-12.
- Qureshi B, Inafuku K, Masamoto H, Kanezawa K. Ultrasonographic evaluation of lower uterine segment to predict the integrity and quality of caesarean scar during pregnancy. A prospective study. Tohukas J Exp Med 1997; 183(1): 55 – 65.
- Singh VK, Nawani M, Bhagliwal A, Rohtagi B. Trial of labour in patients with previous caesarean section. J Obst. Gyne India 1995, 45(5): 640 – 4.
- Pathania K, Premi HK, Gupta T, Sood A. Delivery following previous caesarean section (A prospective study) J Obst. Gyne India 2000; 50(4): 63 – 67.
- Flamm BL, New man LA, Thomas SJ, Fallon D, Yoshida MM. Vaginal birth after caesarean delivery: Results of a 5 year multicentre collaboration study. Obstet Gynecol 1990; 76: 750.
- Iyer S, Hand PR, Basu SB, Delivery after one previous caesarean section – one year prospective study. J Obst. Gyne India 2001; 51(2): 51 – 4.
- Asakura H, Nakai A, Ishikawa G, Suzuki S, Araki T. Prediction of uterine dehiscence by measuring lower uterine segment thickness prior to the onset of labour: evaluation by transvagial ultrasonography. J Nippon Med Sch 2000; 67(5): 352 – 6.
Corresponding Author
Urvashi Verma
S. N. Medical College
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v6i5.23
