Skip to content

Isthmocele After Two Different Sutures in Cesarean Section

Isthmocele After Two Different Sutures in Cesarean Section

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04073264
Enrollment
300
Registered
2019-08-29
Start date
2019-09-01
Completion date
2021-07-25
Last updated
2021-08-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Cesarean Scar Defect

Brief summary

Cesarean delivery (CD) rates are rising globally. about 30% of women delivered by CD in 2015 only in the USA. This increasing CD rate has stimulated an interest in the potential short- and long-term morbidity of CD scars. In more than 50% of women with history of CD, a uterine scar defect, also called a isthmocele, defined as a disruption of the myometrium in the CD uterine scar, can be observed when examined by gel instillation sonohysterography 6-12 months after the CD. Uterine scar defects detected on ultrasound have been associated with prolonged menstrual bleeding and postmenstrual spotting, as well as with an increased risk of several obstetrical complications in subsequent pregnancies, including uterine dehiscence and/or rupture, scar pregnancy and placenta previa and accreta. Another screening method associated with uterine scar rupture in women with prior CD is ultrasonographic measurement of the thickness of the lower uterine segment, as pioneered by Rozenberg et al. in 1996. A meta-analysis by Kok et al. supports the use of the residual myometrial thickness (RMT) for predicting uterine rupture during vaginal birth after cesarean. Uterine scar defects have been associated with lower RMT. A growing body of evidence suggests that the surgical technique for uterine closure influences uterine scar healing and the RMT, but there is still no consensus about optimal uterine closure and type of suture. It is imperative to have evidence-based guidelines for each surgical step before recommending one technique over another. The aim of our trial is to evaluate the incidence of cesarean scar defect according to type of suture at the time of cesarean

Interventions

PROCEDUREmonofilament

In the intervention group,monofilament absorbable suture,will be used.

Sponsors

Federico II University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
18 Years to 45 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Pregnant women with singleton gestations * Between ≥37 and ≤42 gestational age * \>18 \<45 years * Undergoing primary or secondary elective or urgent cesarean delivery

Exclusion criteria

* Multiple gestations * Preterm cesarean * 2 or more prior cesarean deliveries * Uterine malformations * Prior myomectomy * Placenta accreta/previa

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
incidence of cesarean scar defects at ultrasound 6-months follow-up6-months follow-up after cesarean

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
incidence of scar defects at hysteroscopy at 6 months follow-up6-months follow-up after cesarean
Symptoms of cesarean scar defect6-months follow-up after cesareanincluding pain, Abnormal bleeding, Vaginal discharge, Painful periods
RMT6-months follow-up after cesareanresidual myometrial thickness at ultrasound

Countries

Italy

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026