ArticleSAGE open medical case reports2023
Spontaneous cesarean scar dehiscence during pregnancy: A case report and review of the literature.
Article in SAGE open medical case reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Rare Case of Secondary Postpartum Hemorrhage Due to Intrauterine Hematoma and Uterine Scar Dehiscence.Cureus · 2026Article
- Analyzing Influencing Factors of Uterine Rupture in Pregnant Women with Scarred Uterus Undergoing Repeat Delivery and Evaluating the Predictive Value of Lower Uterine Anterior Wall Thickness.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
- Article
- Severe Complications of Uterine Dehiscence Post-Lower Segment Cesarean Section: A Case Report Emphasizing the Importance of Timely Diagnosis and Intervention.The American journal of case reports · 2024Article
- Prenatal Detection and Conservative Management of Uterine Scar Dehiscence in Patient with Previous Uterine Rupture and Multiple Surgeries-A Case Report.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Unexpected Uterine Rupture-A Case Report, Review of the Literature and Clinical Suggestions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Worldwide, the incidence of cesarean sections has increased. Cesarean scar dehiscence, in which the scar tissue from the prior cesarean section is disrupted and separated, is one of the most significant complications of cesarean deliveries. Spontaneous cesarean scar dehiscence is among rare obstetric events. It carries catastrophic fetal and maternal complications. Timing of occurrence, screening, diagnosis, and obstetrics management in the current and subsequent pregnancies are full of controversies. Here, we present a case of spontaneous cesarean scar dehiscence in a patient who had an inter-pregnancy interval of only 4 months. We present the case of spontaneous cesarean scar dehiscence during pregnancy in a 30-year-old patient from western Ethiopia. She got pregnant after 4 months of previous cesarean delivery. Currently, she presented to the hospital with previous two cesarean scars and a term pregnancy. Intraoperative findings showed separation of the uterine wall which is covered by only fetal membranes. After delivering the fetus and placenta, the uterus was repaired in two layers. The patient had a smooth postoperative course and was discharged on the fifth day with appropriate counseling. During pregnancy, there is a chance of spontaneous cesarean scar dehiscence. Therefore, it is essential to properly assess pregnant mothers who have had a previous cesarean scar. If the cesarean scar dehiscence is diagnosed before the elective cesarean section, the obstetrician should get prepared to prevent potential complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.