ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2026
Association between gestational age at planned repeat cesarean delivery and uterine scar dehiscence.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the association between gestational age at planned repeat cesarean delivery and intraoperatively diagnosed uterine scar dehiscence (USD), and to assess gestational age-specific neonatal outcomes.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included women with at least one previous cesarean delivery who underwent pre-labor planned repeat cesarean delivery between 38 + 3 and 39 + 3 weeks of gestation from 2019 to 2025. Gestational age was categorized as 38 + 3 to 38 + 4, 38 + 5 to 39 + 0, and 39 + 1 to 39 + 3 weeks. The primary outcome was intraoperatively diagnosed USD. Multivariable logistic regression was performed in the full cohort, and propensity score matching was used as a sensitivity analysis.
resultsAmong 1,104 women, 184 had intraoperatively diagnosed USD. Delivery at 39 + 1 to 39 + 3 weeks was associated with higher odds of USD compared with 38 + 5 to 39 + 0 weeks (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 3.53; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.47-5.04; p < 0.001), whereas delivery at 38 + 3 to 38 + 4 weeks was not (aOR: 0.92; 95% CI 0.58-1.45; p = 0.720). Neonatal outcomes were presented descriptively and were underpowered for multivariable adjustment. Previous cesarean delivery ≥ 2 (aOR: 5.20; 95% CI 3.47-7.79), interdelivery interval ≤ 2 years (aOR: 2.85; 95% CI 1.80-4.50), and antenatal suspected macrosomia (aOR: 2.24; 95% CI 1.34-3.73) were independently associated with USD. The matched sensitivity analysis showed consistent findings.
conclusionsDelivery at 39 + 1 to 39 + 3 weeks was associated with higher odds of intraoperatively diagnosed USD than delivery at 38 + 5 to 39 + 0 weeks. Previous cesarean delivery ≥ 2, interdelivery interval ≤ 2 years, and antenatal suspected macrosomia were independently associated with USD.
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.