The impact of caesarean scar niche on fertility - a systematic review.

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-22 DOI:10.1080/01443615.2024.2349714
M M van den Tweel, S van der Struijs, S Le Cessie, K E Boers
{"title":"The impact of caesarean scar niche on fertility - a systematic review.","authors":"M M van den Tweel, S van der Struijs, S Le Cessie, K E Boers","doi":"10.1080/01443615.2024.2349714","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The trend of increasing caesarean section (CS) rates brings up questions related to subfertility. Research regarding the influence of CS on assisted reproduction techniques (ART) is conflicting. A potential mechanism behind CS-induced subfertility is intra uterine fluid resulting from a caesarean scar defect or niche. The vaginal microbiome has been repeatedly connected to negative ART outcomes, but it is unknown if the microbiome is changed in relation to a niche.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review describes literature investigating the effect of a niche on live birth rates after assisted reproduction. Furthermore, studies investigating a difference in microbial composition in subfertile persons with a niche compared to no niche are evaluated. Pubmed, Embase and Web of Science were searched on March 2023 for comparative studies on both study questions. Inclusion criteria were i.e., English language, human-only studies, availability of the full article and presence of comparative pregnancy data on a niche. The quality of the included studies and their risk of bias were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for cohort studies. The results were graphically displayed in a forest plot.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six retrospective cohort studies could be included on fertility outcomes, with a total of 1083 persons with a niche and 3987 without a niche. The overall direction of effect shows a negative impact of a niche on the live birth rate (pooled aOR 0.58, 95% CI 0.48-0.69) with low-grade evidence. Three studies comparing the microbiome between persons with and without a CS could be identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is low-grade evidence to conclude that the presence of a niche reduces live birth rates when compared to persons without a niche. The theory that a caesarean has a negative impact on pregnancy outcomes because of dysbiosis promoted by the niche is interesting, but there is no sufficient literature about this.</p>","PeriodicalId":16627,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","volume":"44 1","pages":"2349714"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01443615.2024.2349714","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The trend of increasing caesarean section (CS) rates brings up questions related to subfertility. Research regarding the influence of CS on assisted reproduction techniques (ART) is conflicting. A potential mechanism behind CS-induced subfertility is intra uterine fluid resulting from a caesarean scar defect or niche. The vaginal microbiome has been repeatedly connected to negative ART outcomes, but it is unknown if the microbiome is changed in relation to a niche.

Methods: This systematic review describes literature investigating the effect of a niche on live birth rates after assisted reproduction. Furthermore, studies investigating a difference in microbial composition in subfertile persons with a niche compared to no niche are evaluated. Pubmed, Embase and Web of Science were searched on March 2023 for comparative studies on both study questions. Inclusion criteria were i.e., English language, human-only studies, availability of the full article and presence of comparative pregnancy data on a niche. The quality of the included studies and their risk of bias were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for cohort studies. The results were graphically displayed in a forest plot.

Results: Six retrospective cohort studies could be included on fertility outcomes, with a total of 1083 persons with a niche and 3987 without a niche. The overall direction of effect shows a negative impact of a niche on the live birth rate (pooled aOR 0.58, 95% CI 0.48-0.69) with low-grade evidence. Three studies comparing the microbiome between persons with and without a CS could be identified.

Conclusion: There is low-grade evidence to conclude that the presence of a niche reduces live birth rates when compared to persons without a niche. The theory that a caesarean has a negative impact on pregnancy outcomes because of dysbiosis promoted by the niche is interesting, but there is no sufficient literature about this.

剖腹产疤痕龛对生育的影响--系统综述。
背景:剖腹产率(CS)上升的趋势带来了与不孕症有关的问题。有关剖腹产对辅助生殖技术(ART)影响的研究相互矛盾。CS诱发不孕症的一个潜在机制是剖腹产疤痕缺陷或龛影导致的子宫内积液。阴道微生物群与 ART 的负面结果反复出现关联,但微生物群是否会因龛位而发生变化尚不清楚:本系统综述介绍了研究阴道龛对辅助生殖后活产率影响的文献。此外,还评估了调查有生态位与无生态位的亚健康人群微生物组成差异的研究。2023 年 3 月,我们在 Pubmed、Embase 和 Web of Science 上搜索了有关这两个研究问题的比较研究。纳入标准为:英语、纯人类研究、文章全文可用性以及存在关于生态位的妊娠比较数据。采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华队列研究量表对纳入研究的质量及其偏倚风险进行了评估。结果以森林图的形式显示:结果:共纳入了六项有关生育结果的回顾性队列研究,其中有生态位的研究有 1083 人,没有生态位的研究有 3987 人。总体效应方向显示,生态位对活产率有负面影响(汇总 aOR 0.58,95% CI 0.48-0.69),证据等级较低。有三项研究比较了有CS和无CS人群的微生物组:有低等级证据表明,与没有壁龛的人相比,有壁龛的人会降低活产率。剖腹产会对妊娠结果产生负面影响,因为生态位促进了菌群失调,这一理论很有意思,但目前还没有足够的相关文献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
7.70%
发文量
398
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology represents an established forum for the entire field of obstetrics and gynaecology, publishing a broad range of original, peer-reviewed papers, from scientific and clinical research to reviews relevant to practice. It also includes occasional supplements on clinical symposia. The journal is read widely by trainees in our specialty and we acknowledge a major role in education in Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Past and present editors have recognized the difficulties that junior doctors encounter in achieving their first publications and spend time advising authors during their initial attempts at submission. The journal continues to attract a world-wide readership thanks to the emphasis on practical applicability and its excellent record of drawing on an international base of authors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信