ArticleCureus2023
Comparison of Clinical and Radiological Findings for the Prediction of Scar Integrity in Women With Previous Lower Segment Cesarean Sections.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionWe aimed to compare the clinical and radiological findings to predict scar integrity in term antenatal mothers with a previous lower segment cesarean section (LSCS). METHODOLOGY: This prospective study was conducted in the obstetrics and gynecology department of LN Medical College, Bhopal, India, from August 2020 to August 2021. We included all pregnant women with term gestation (37+0 to 42+0 weeks) who were admitted either for elective repeat LSCS or for emergency LSCS and had a history of a previous LSCS. A detailed history and clinical examinations were performed. We noted the presence of scar tenderness and conducted transabdominal ultrasound (USG) to assess the integrity of the uterine scar in all women. During surgery, the surgeon identified the lower uterine segment scar and graded it as normal, thinned-out, dehiscent, or ruptured. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for both clinical findings (scar tenderness) and ultrasound findings as predictors of scar integrity.
resultsA total of 60 pregnant women were included in the study. During a repeat cesarean section, we found a thinned-out scar in 26 women out of 60 (43.3%). Out of 60 women, 13 had scar tenderness, and among these 13 women, 12 had thinned-out scars intraoperatively. Forty-seven women had no scar tenderness; 14 had thinned-out scars intraoperatively. The sensitivity of scar tenderness as a predictor of a thinned-out scar was 46.2%, specificity was 97.1%, PPV was 92.3%, and NPV was 70.2%. Whereas the sensitivity of ultrasound scar thickness as a predictor of a thinned-out scar was only 19.2%, with a specificity of 94.1%, a PPV of 71.4%, and an NPV of 60.4%. Thus, we documented a significant correlation between intraoperative and clinical findings (κ = 0.46; p<0.05), but no agreement could be found between ultrasound and intraoperative findings (p>0.05).
conclusionsClinically evident scar tenderness continues to be a useful parameter to predict intraoperative scar status.
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.