RESUMEN
Early diagnosis and appropriate management of Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) are crucial to prevent severe complications, such as uterine rupture, severe hemorrhage and placenta accreta spectrum disorders. In this article, we provide a step-by-step tutorial for the standardized sonographic evaluation of CSP in the first trimester. Practical steps for performing a standardized transvaginal ultrasound examination to diagnose CSP are outlined, focusing on criteria and techniques essential for accurate identification and classification. Key sonographic markers, including gestational sac location, cardiac activity, placental implantation and myometrial thickness, are detailed. The evaluation process is presented according to assessment of the uterine scar, differential diagnosis, detailed CSP evaluation and CSP classification. This step-by-step tutorial emphasizes the importance of scanning in two planes (sagittal and transverse), utilizing color or power Doppler and differentiating CSP from other low-lying pregnancies. The CSP classification is described in detail and is based on the location of the largest part of the gestational sac relative to the uterine cavity and serosal lines. This descriptive classification is recommended for clinical use to stimulate uniform description and evaluation. Such a standardized sonographic evaluation of CSP in the first trimester is essential for early diagnosis and management, helping to prevent life-threatening complications and to preserve fertility. Training sonographers in detailed evaluation techniques and promoting awareness of CSP are critical. The structured approach to CSP diagnosis presented herein is supported by a free e-learning course available online. © 2024 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Asunto(s)
Cesárea , Cicatriz , Primer Trimestre del Embarazo , Embarazo Ectópico , Ultrasonografía Prenatal , Femenino , Humanos , Embarazo , Cesárea/efectos adversos , Cicatriz/diagnóstico por imagen , Cicatriz/etiología , Saco Gestacional/diagnóstico por imagen , Embarazo Ectópico/diagnóstico por imagen , Embarazo Ectópico/etiología , Ultrasonografía Doppler en Color , Ultrasonografía Prenatal/normasRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To develop a standardized sonographic evaluation and reporting system for Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) in the first trimester, for use by both general gynecology and expert clinics. METHODS: A modified Delphi procedure was carried out, in which 28 international experts in obstetric and gynecological ultrasonography were invited to participate. Extensive experience in the use of ultrasound to evaluate Cesarean section (CS) scars in early pregnancy and/or publications concerning CSP or niche evaluation was required to participate. Relevant items for the detection and evaluation of CSP were determined based on the results of a literature search. Consensus was predefined as a level of agreement of at least 70% for each item, and a minimum of three Delphi rounds were planned (two online questionnaires and one group meeting). RESULTS: Sixteen experts participated in the Delphi study and four Delphi rounds were performed. In total, 58 items were determined to be relevant. We differentiated between basic measurements to be performed in general practice and advanced measurements for expert centers or for research purposes. The panel also formulated advice on indications for referral to an expert clinic. Consensus was reached for all 58 items on the definition, terminology, relevant items for evaluation and reporting of CSP. It was recommended that the first CS scar evaluation to determine the location of the pregnancy should be performed at 6-7 weeks' gestation using transvaginal ultrasound. The use of magnetic resonance imaging was not considered to add value in the diagnosis of CSP. A CSP was defined as a pregnancy with implantation in, or in close contact with, the niche. The experts agreed that a CSP can occur only when a niche is present and not in relation to a healed CS scar. Relevant sonographic items to record included gestational sac (GS) size, vascularity, location in relation to the uterine vessels, thickness of the residual myometrium and location of the pregnancy in relation to the uterine cavity and serosa. According to its location, a CSP can be classified as: (1) CSP in which the largest part of the GS protrudes towards the uterine cavity; (2) CSP in which the largest part of the GS is embedded in the myometrium but does not cross the serosal contour; and (3) CSP in which the GS is partially located beyond the outer contour of the cervix or uterus. The type of CSP may change with advancing gestation. Future studies are needed to validate this reporting system and the value of the different CSP types. CONCLUSION: Consensus was achieved among experts regarding the sonographic evaluation and reporting of CSP in the first trimester. © 2021 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Asunto(s)
Cicatriz , Embarazo Ectópico , Cesárea/efectos adversos , Cicatriz/diagnóstico por imagen , Técnica Delphi , Femenino , Humanos , Embarazo , Embarazo Ectópico/diagnóstico por imagen , UltrasonografíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To generate guidance for detailed uterine niche evaluation by ultrasonography in the non-pregnant woman, using a modified Delphi procedure amongst European experts. METHODS: Twenty gynecological experts were approached through their membership of the European Niche Taskforce. All experts were physicians with extensive experience in niche evaluation in clinical practice and/or authors of niche publications. By means of a modified Delphi procedure, relevant items for niche measurement were determined based on the results of a literature search and recommendations of a focus group of six Dutch experts. It was predetermined that at least three Delphi rounds would be performed (two online questionnaires completed by the expert panel and one group meeting). For it to be declared that consensus had been reached, a consensus rate for each item of at least 70% was predefined. RESULTS: Fifteen experts participated in the Delphi procedure. Consensus was reached for all 42 items on niche evaluation, including definitions, relevance, method of measurement and tips for visualization of the niche. A niche was defined as an indentation at the site of a Cesarean section with a depth of at least 2 mm. Basic measurements, including niche length and depth, residual and adjacent myometrial thickness in the sagittal plane, and niche width in the transverse plane, were considered to be essential. If present, branches should be reported and additional measurements should be made. The use of gel or saline contrast sonography was preferred over standard transvaginal sonography but was not considered mandatory if intrauterine fluid was present. Variation in pressure generated by the transvaginal probe can facilitate imaging, and Doppler imaging can be used to differentiate between a niche and other uterine abnormalities, but neither was considered mandatory. CONCLUSION: Consensus between niche experts was achieved regarding ultrasonographic niche evaluation. © 2018 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Asunto(s)
Ultrasonografía , Anomalías Urogenitales/diagnóstico por imagen , Útero/anomalías , Adulto , Cicatriz/diagnóstico por imagen , Consenso , Técnica Delphi , Femenino , Humanos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Útero/diagnóstico por imagenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Double-layer compared to single-layer closure of the uterus after a caesarean section (CS) leads to a thicker myometrial layer at the site of the CS scar, also called residual myometrium thickness (RMT). It possibly decreases the development of a niche, which is an interruption of the myometrium at the site of the uterine scar. Thin RMT and a niche are associated with gynaecological symptoms, obstetric complications in a subsequent pregnancy and delivery and possibly with subfertility. METHODS: Women undergoing a first CS regardless of the gestational age will be asked to participate in this multicentre, double blinded randomised controlled trial (RCT). They will be randomised to single-layer closure or double-layer closure of the uterine incision. Single-layer closure (control group) is performed with a continuous running, unlocked suture, with or without endometrial saving technique. Double-layer closure (intervention group) is performed with the first layer in a continuous unlocked suture including the endometrial layer and the second layer is also continuous unlocked and imbricates the first. The primary outcome is the reported number of days with postmenstrual spotting during one menstrual cycle nine months after CS. Secondary outcomes include surgical data, ultrasound evaluation at three months, menstrual pattern, dysmenorrhea, quality of life, and sexual function at nine months. Structured transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) evaluation is performed to assess the uterine scar and if necessary saline infusion sonohysterography (SIS) or gel instillation sonohysterography (GIS) will be added to the examination. Women and ultrasound examiners will be blinded for allocation. Reproductive outcomes at three years follow-up including fertility, mode of delivery and complications in subsequent deliveries will be studied as well. Analyses will be performed by intention to treat. 2290 women have to be randomised to show a reduction of 15% in the mean number of spotting days. Additionally, a cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed from a societal perspective. DISCUSSION: This RCT will provide insight in the outcomes of single- compared to double-layer closure technique after CS, including postmenstrual spotting and subfertility in relation to niche development measured by ultrasound. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register ( NTR5480 ). Registered 29 October 2015.