Prediction of Intra-abdominal Adhesions and Uterine Scar Grade Based on Abdominal Scar Characteristics in Women With a Previous Cesarean Section: A Diagnostic Accuracy Study.

Eplasty Pub Date : 2025-01-29 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01
Vignesh Durai, Gowri Dorairajan
{"title":"Prediction of Intra-abdominal Adhesions and Uterine Scar Grade Based on Abdominal Scar Characteristics in Women With a Previous Cesarean Section: A Diagnostic Accuracy Study.","authors":"Vignesh Durai, Gowri Dorairajan","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aims to investigate the relationship between cutaneous scar morphology and severe intra-abdominal adhesions and to predict uterine scar grade in repeat cesarean sections. It could be a valuable tool to plan elective repeat cesarean sections in patients with predicted weak uterine scars and also to have an experienced surgeon for repeat cesareans in patients predicted to have dense intra-abdominal adhesions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Preoperatively, the external scar was assessed using the Manchester score in 260 women. Intraoperatively, the Knightly score was used for adhesions at 5 different sites. The total adhesion score was categorized into scores ≤5 and >5 (severe adhesions). The uterine scar was graded using the Qureshi method and grouped into intact scar and weak scar (grades 3 and 4). Fischer exact and chi-square tests were used to compare the groups. The receiver operating characteristic curve calculated a cutoff score for predicting severe adhesions and weak scars.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 260 patients, 63.5% had adhesions and 36.5% had no adhesions. The distortion of the skin scar had 71.3% specificity, and the texture had 84.8% sensitivity in predicting severe adhesions. Similarly, the texture had 72.2% sensitivity, and the distortion had 68.3% specificity in predicting weak uterine scar. A Manchester Scar Scale score of 9 includes the area under the curve of 0.72 for predicting severe adhesions and 0.62 for predicting weak uterine scar. A score of 9 was 66.6% sensitive and 66.5% specific, with a negative predictive value (NPV) of 93.2% for predicting severe adhesions. The same score was 55.5% sensitive and 65.1% specific, with an NPV of 90.1% for predicting weak uterine scar.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A Manchester Scar Scale cutoff score of 9 has a high NPV for predicting severe adhesions and weak uterine scar. The texture had high sensitivity, and distortion had high specificity for predicting severe adhesions.</p>","PeriodicalId":93993,"journal":{"name":"Eplasty","volume":"25 ","pages":"e5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12132594/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eplasty","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study aims to investigate the relationship between cutaneous scar morphology and severe intra-abdominal adhesions and to predict uterine scar grade in repeat cesarean sections. It could be a valuable tool to plan elective repeat cesarean sections in patients with predicted weak uterine scars and also to have an experienced surgeon for repeat cesareans in patients predicted to have dense intra-abdominal adhesions.

Methods: Preoperatively, the external scar was assessed using the Manchester score in 260 women. Intraoperatively, the Knightly score was used for adhesions at 5 different sites. The total adhesion score was categorized into scores ≤5 and >5 (severe adhesions). The uterine scar was graded using the Qureshi method and grouped into intact scar and weak scar (grades 3 and 4). Fischer exact and chi-square tests were used to compare the groups. The receiver operating characteristic curve calculated a cutoff score for predicting severe adhesions and weak scars.

Results: Of the 260 patients, 63.5% had adhesions and 36.5% had no adhesions. The distortion of the skin scar had 71.3% specificity, and the texture had 84.8% sensitivity in predicting severe adhesions. Similarly, the texture had 72.2% sensitivity, and the distortion had 68.3% specificity in predicting weak uterine scar. A Manchester Scar Scale score of 9 includes the area under the curve of 0.72 for predicting severe adhesions and 0.62 for predicting weak uterine scar. A score of 9 was 66.6% sensitive and 66.5% specific, with a negative predictive value (NPV) of 93.2% for predicting severe adhesions. The same score was 55.5% sensitive and 65.1% specific, with an NPV of 90.1% for predicting weak uterine scar.

Conclusions: A Manchester Scar Scale cutoff score of 9 has a high NPV for predicting severe adhesions and weak uterine scar. The texture had high sensitivity, and distortion had high specificity for predicting severe adhesions.

基于既往剖宫产女性腹部疤痕特征的腹内粘连和子宫疤痕等级预测:一项诊断准确性研究
背景:本研究旨在探讨皮肤瘢痕形态与严重腹内粘连的关系,并预测重复剖宫产术中子宫瘢痕的分级。这可能是一个有价值的工具,以计划选择性重复剖宫产手术的患者预测弱子宫疤痕,也有经验的外科医生为重复剖宫产手术的患者预测有密集的腹腔粘连。方法:术前对260例患者采用曼彻斯特评分法进行瘢痕评定。术中,knight评分用于5个不同部位的粘连。粘连总分分为≤5分和bbb50分(重度粘连)。采用库雷希法对子宫瘢痕进行分级,分为完整瘢痕和弱瘢痕(3级和4级)。采用Fischer精确检验和卡方检验进行组间比较。接受者工作特征曲线计算了预测严重粘连和弱疤痕的截止评分。结果:260例患者中有粘连者占63.5%,无粘连者占36.5%。疤痕变形的特异性为71.3%,质地预测严重粘连的敏感性为84.8%。同样,质地的敏感性为72.2%,扭曲度的特异性为68.3%。曼彻斯特疤痕量表评分为9分,其中预测严重粘连的曲线下面积为0.72,预测弱子宫疤痕的曲线下面积为0.62。9分敏感性66.6%,特异性66.5%,预测严重粘连的阴性预测值(NPV)为93.2%。该评分的敏感性为55.5%,特异性为65.1%,预测子宫轻度瘢痕的NPV为90.1%。结论:9分的曼氏瘢痕评分对于预测严重粘连和弱子宫瘢痕具有较高的净pv值。质地具有高敏感性,变形对预测严重粘连具有高特异性。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信