HEALTH OF WOMAN. 2020.9-10(155-156): 39-43; doi 10.15574/HW.2020.155-156.39
Kovyda N. , Honcharuk N.
Kyiv City Maternity Hospital № 1, Kyiv

The dynamic increase in the number of caesarean section in Ukraine and around the world remains one of the main topics of discussion, which is intensively discussing by leading scientists.
The traditional assessment of the ability of the uterus scar during pregnancy, based mainly on the analysis of clinical and anamnestic data, is not high informative, and the ambiguous conclusions of the sonographic study indicate the need for further detailed study.
Therefore, there is reason to believe that the development of criteria for ultrasound assessment of the condition of the uterus scar after previous cesarean section will use them to predict the possibility of spontaneous delivery in the future and remains relevant.
The objective: study the features of ultrasound diagnosis of the condition of the scar on the uterus in pregnant and non-pregnant women.
Materials and methods. Observations and retrospective analysis of medical records of pregnant women and birth histories in 150 women with a scar on the uterus after a previous cesarean section for the period from 2014–2019.
Results. In women who became pregnant up to a year after the previous cesarean section, the most pronounced changes in blood flow were in the uterine arteries, especially during gestation 28–34 weeks. Also, in women with a failed uterus scar, changes in blood flow were most often observed in the uterine arteries at all levels and were significantly higher, compared with women with a capable uterus scar and women from the control group. In women with an insolvent uterus scar, the most pronounced changes in the indices of vascular resistance was observed in the uterine arteries, in particular the right uterine artery.
Conclusion. The peculiarities of blood flow and vascular resistance in different vessels of the myometrium depending on the gestation period and the timing of pregnancy after a previous cesarean section. The obtained detailed ultrasound examination and mathematical calculation of the results of ultrasound examination of the uterus and postoperative uterus scar after previous cesarean section in non-pregnant women allowed to create a scale for assessing the condition of the uterus scar after previous cesarean section in non-pregnant women.
Keywords: cesarean section, uterus scar, ultrasound, pre-pregnancy preparation of women.

REFERENCES

1. Krasnopolskiy VI, Logutova LS, Buyanova SN. 2013. Nesostoyatelniy rubets na matke posle kesareva secheniya: prichiny formirovaniya i lechebnaya taktika. Akusherstvo i ginekologiya 12:28–33.

2. Kuzmina TE, Pashkov VM i Klinduhov IA. 2015. Pregravidarnaya podgotovka. Sovremennyie kontseptsii. Voprosy ginekologii, akusherstva i perinatologii 14(5):46–54.

3. Schukina NA, Blagina EI, Barinova IV. 2015. Prichinyi formirovaniya i metodyi profilaktiki nesostoyatelnogo rubtsa na matke posle kesareva secheniya. Almanah klinicheskoy meditsiny 3:85-92. https://doi.org/10.18786/2072-0505-2015-37-85-92

4. Basic E, Basic Cetkovic V, Kozaric H, Rama A. 2012. Ultrasound evaluation of uterine scar after Cesarean section and next birth. Medicinski Arhiv. 66;3:41-44. https://doi.org/10.5455/medarh.2012.66.s41-s44; PMid:22937691

5. Blomberg M. 2016, May. Avoiding the first cesarean section – results of structured organizational and cultural changes. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 95(5):580-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.12872; PMid:26870916

6. Dodd JM, Crowther CA, Huertas E, Guise JM, Horey D. 2013. Planned elective repeat caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for women with a previous caesarean birth. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. (12):CD004224. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004224.pub3; PMid:24323886

7. Dosedla E, Calda P. 2016, Oct. Can the final sonographic assessment of the cesarean section scar be predicted 6 weeks after the operation? Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 55(5):18-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjog.2015.07.006; PMid:27751422

8. Mekiňová L, Janků P, Filipinská E, Kadlecová J, Ventruba P. 2016, Winter. Cesarean section incidence and vaginal birth success rate at term pregnancy after myomectomy. Ceska Gynekol. 81(6):404-410.

9. Parant O. 2012. Uterine rupture: prediction, diagnosis et management. J. Gynecol. Obstet. Biol. Reprod. 41(8):803-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgyn.2012.09.036; PMid:23123232

10. Risager JK, Uldbjerg N & Glavind J. 2020. Cesarean scar thickness in non-pregnant women as a risk factor for uterine rupture. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal& Neonatal Medicine, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2020.1719065; PMid:31992102

11. Scott JR. 2014. Intrapartum management of trial of labour after caesarean delivery: evidence and experience. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 121(2):15-62. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.12449; PMid:24044760