Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29416572›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine research2018

Etiology of Cesarean Uterine Scar Defect (Niche): Detailed Critical Analysis of Hypotheses and Prevention Strategies and Peritoneal Closure Debate.

Shashikant L Sholapurkar

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03851003 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

The Influence of Endometrial Suturing During Cesarean Section on the Risk to Develop Uterine Scar Defect: A Randomized Control Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorSheba Medical CenterRan2019 to 2022Enrolled130ConditionsCesarean Wound DisruptionArmsEndometrial suturing, Non- endometrial suturing, Vaginal ultrasonography, Questionnaire
NCT07228858 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Uterine Scar Resection During Repeat Cesarean Delivery in a Simple Modification to Prevent Uterine Niche Formation: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorBenha UniversityRan2025 to 2025Enrolled170ConditionsCesarean Section Complications, Scar Niche, Scarred UterusArmsRepeated cesarean section with previous uterine cesarean section scar resection, Repeated cesarean section without uterine scar resection, Saline-infusion Sonohysterography
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 100 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Determinants of residual myometrial thickness after cesarean delivery: Comparative analysis of barbed versus conventional sutures-A sub-analysis from the SPIRAL trial.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Isthmocele and Infertility.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shashikant L SholapurkarDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Royal United Hospital, Combe Park, Bath, BA1 3NG, UK. Email: s.sholapurkar@nhs.net.
Royal United Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is an increasing incidence of cesarean scar (CS) defect/niche and its sequelae, probably not entirely explained by better diagnosis or rising cesarean rate. Discussion of possible etiological factors has received scant attention but would be important to formulate preventive strategies. Meaningful informative studies on long-term sequelae of cesarean section are very difficult and none are available for causation of CS defect. Hence, it is crucial to identify key areas in etiology of CS defect for focused research. This practical review proposes an "ischemia and mal-apposition hypothesis for CS niche", stating that the surgical technique of uterine incision closure is the most important determinant of CS defect formation. Other factors such as cervical location incision, adhesion formation and patient specific factors seem far less important in etiology. Rather than the headline theme of "single versus double-layer closure of uterus", the finer details of surgical technique which achieve good apposition without inducing tissue ischemia seem more important. Different techniques are discussed and it is proposed that continuous, non-locking absorbable sutures in two layers, without including much of decidua and without undue tight (constricting/devasculaizing) pulling of sutures are likely to result in good healing of uterine scar. Single-layer technique may be best reserved for thin myometrial edges especially during repeat cesareans. Adhesions between uterine isthmus and bladder/abdominal wall seem common associations but not causative for CS niche. It would be desirable to prove these surgical principles by good quality prospective randomized "quantitative" studies but the wait may be very long and this should not hinder the adoption of good surgical principles. Science is much cognitive and not just empirical. To consider a related example, the current recommendation of non-suturing of peritoneal layers during cesarean is mistakenly based on short-term irrelevant surrogate outcomes like analgesic requirements and time-saving, many of which have been already disproven. Evidence is presented recommending simple quick techniques of peritoneal closure to prevent adhesions. More analytical debate in surgical techniques is needed to inspire engaged, critical and insightful practitioners rather than unquestioning dependence on weak evidence/guidance.

Indexed as

Adhesion formation after cesareanCesarean double layer closureCesarean scar defectCesarean scar nicheCesarean single layer closureEtiology of cesarean scar defectPeritoneal closure during cesareanUterine incision closure

Identifiers

PMID29416572
PMCPMC5798260
OpenAlexW2784667873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.