ArticleThe American journal of case reports2024
Severe Complications of Uterine Dehiscence Post-Lower Segment Cesarean Section: A Case Report Emphasizing the Importance of Timely Diagnosis and Intervention.
Article in The American journal of case reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ultrasound assessment of maternal risk factors for uterine scar dehiscence in repeat cesarean deliveries: a case-control study from Beirut clinic.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Uterine dehiscence, an infrequent event often mistaken for uterine rupture, is rarely linked to post-cesarean section procedures and can result in severe complications, notably puerperal sepsis. In this report, we present a case that exemplifies the onset of puerperal sepsis and the emergence of intra-abdominal abscesses attributed to uterine dehiscence following a lower segment cesarean section (LSCS). CASE REPORT Our patient, a 28-year-old woman in her third pregnancy, underwent LSCS 1 week earlier. Subsequently, she returned to the hospital with lower abdominal pains, fever, and malodorous vaginal discharge. Computed tomography (CT) scan of whole abdomen verified uterine dehiscence and pus collection at the subhepatic region and right paracolic gutter. After referral to a specialized hospital, laboratory findings indicated an elevated white blood cell count and alkaline phosphatase levels, and coagulation abnormalities. She underwent an exploratory laparotomy, which unveiled uterine dehiscence, abscesses, and adhesions, necessitating a total abdominal hysterectomy and abdominal toileting. Pus culture analysis identified the presence of E. coli, which was susceptible to ampicillin/sulbactam. Complications were encountered after surgery, including wound dehiscence and pus re-accumulation. Successful management involved vacuum dressings and percutaneous drainage. Eventually, her condition improved and she was discharged, without additional complications. CONCLUSIONS This report underscores the importance of considering cesarean scar dehiscence as a diagnosis in women with previous cesarean deliveries who present during subsequent pregnancies with symptoms such as abdominal pain or abdominal sepsis. Diagnostic tools, such as CT, play pivotal roles, and the timely performance of an exploratory laparotomy is paramount when suspicion arises.
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.