Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39441166›Full record

Observational studyLa Tunisie medicale2024

Hana Hakim, Mohamed Derbel, Hajer Mtibaa, Basma Akrout, Khaled Trigui, Fatma Chaker, Fatma Khanfir, Kais Chaabane

Abstract readObservational StudyEnglish Abstract
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in La Tunisie medicale, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Hana HakimDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hedi Chaker Hospital, Sfax. Faculty of Medicine of Sfax, University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Mohamed DerbelDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hedi Chaker Hospital, Sfax. Faculty of Medicine of Sfax, University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Hajer MtibaaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hedi Chaker Hospital, Sfax. Faculty of Medicine of Sfax, University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Basma AkroutDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hedi Chaker Hospital, Sfax. Faculty of Medicine of Sfax, University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Khaled TriguiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hedi Chaker Hospital, Sfax. Faculty of Medicine of Sfax, University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Fatma ChakerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hedi Chaker Hospital, Sfax. Faculty of Medicine of Sfax, University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Fatma KhanfirDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hedi Chaker Hospital, Sfax. Faculty of Medicine of Sfax, University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Kais ChaabaneDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hedi Chaker Hospital, Sfax. Faculty of Medicine of Sfax, University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionVaginal delivery after caesarean section (VBAC) is recommended, but the rising rate of uterine rupture calls into question the safety of this practice.

aimTo identify risk factors for uterine dehiscence and rupture.

methodsThis was a prospective, analytical and descriptive observational study, carried out in a tertiary care maternity. We included all parturients with one previous caesarean section undergoing trial of labor. We assessed the quality of the uterine scar which was evaluated after delivery.

resultsWe included 300 patients with one previous caesarean section undergoing trial of labor. The trial of labor was successful (vaginal delivery) in 50.7% of cases. The uterine scar, assessed after delivery, was of good quality in 79% of cases. We noted 7 cases of uterine rupture, i.e. 2.3% of cases, and dehiscence in 56 patients, i.e. 18.6% of cases. Parity, conditions of previous caesarean section (programmed or emergency) and interpregnancy interval were significantly related to the labor outcome (p=0.004, p=0.001 and p=0.135 respectively). The occurrence of rupture or dehiscence was not significantly related to macrosomia, defined as a neonatal weight greater than 4000g (p=0.135).

conclusionKnowing the risk factors for uterine dehiscence and rupture would enable the obstetrician to properly assess the situation in order to make the correct decision and avoid neonatal and maternal complications.

Indexed as

Surgical Wound DehiscenceTrial of LaborUterine RuptureVaginal Birth after CesareanAdultCesarean SectionFemaleHumansParityPregnancyProspective StudiesRisk FactorsYoung Adultcesarean sectiondehiscencerisk factorrupture

Identifiers

PMID39441166
PMCPMC11574379

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.