ArticleCureus2024
A Complex Obstetric Dilemma: Cesarean Scar Dehiscence.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In clinical practice, scar dehiscence following a previous cesarean section is a serious worry that necessitates close consideration of a number of contributing factors. We present the case of a 29-year-old gravida six, para three, who presented at 36 weeks of gestation with scar tenderness and abdominal discomfort at the site of her previous cesarean section scar. Despite a clear cardiovascular and respiratory examination, the lower-segment scar was notably thin at 1.2 mm, raising concerns for scar rupture. An emergency lower-segment cesarean section revealed a 4 x 2 cm scar dehiscence. The patient was counseled on the risks of future pregnancies and advised to consider tubal ligation. Early complications of cesarean delivery include wound hematoma, infection, and cesarean scar dehiscence (CSD), while long-term issues involve morbid adherent placentae and intra-abdominal adhesions. Short inter-pregnancy intervals and multiple cesarean deliveries are significant risk factors for CSD due to inadequate myometrial healing. Diagnostic imaging, particularly ultrasonography, is crucial for monitoring scar thickness and planning the timing of delivery. Management may involve conservative resuturing or hysterectomy in cases of severe infection or abscess formation. Early detection through vigilant prenatal care and monitoring, coupled with a multidisciplinary approach, can optimize maternal and fetal outcomes. Enhanced education for healthcare providers and expectant mothers, along with technological advancements, are key to improving the management of this complex obstetric dilemma.
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.