Isthmocele: From Risk Factors to Management

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The aim of the present study was to perform a comprehensive review of the literature to provide a complete and clear picture of isthmocele—a hypoechoic area within the myometrium at the site of the uterine scar of a previous cesarean section—by exploring in depth every aspect of this condition.

Methods A comprehensive review of the literature was performed to identify the most relevant studies about this topic.

Results Every aspect of isthmocele has been studied and described: pathophysiology, clinical symptoms, classification, and diagnosis. Its treatment, both medical and surgical, has also been reported according to the actual literature data.

Conclusion Cesarean section is the most common surgical procedure performed worldwide, and one of the consequences of this technique is isthmocele. A single and systematic classification of isthmocele is needed to improve its diagnosis and management. Further studies should be performed to better understand its pathogenesis.

Resumo

Objetivo O objetivo do presente estudo foi realizar uma revisão abrangente da literatura a fim de fornecer um quadro completo e claro da istmocele—uma área hipoecoica dentro do miométrio no local da cicatriz uterina de uma cesariana anterior—aprofundando todos os aspectos desta condição

Métodos Uma revisão abrangente da literatura foi realizada para identificar os estudos mais relevantes sobre este tema.

Resultados Todos os aspectos da istmocele foram estudados e descritos: fisiopatologia, sintomas clínicos, classificação e diagnóstico. Os tratamentos médico e cirúrgico também foram relatados de acordo com os dados reais da literatura.

Conclusão A cesárea é o procedimento cirúrgico mais comum realizado em todo o mundo, e uma das consequências desta técnica é a istmocele. Uma classificação única e sistemática da istmocele é necessária para melhorar seu diagnóstico e manejo. Novos estudos devem ser realizados para melhor entender sua patogênese.

• References

• 1 Tulandi T, Cohen A. Emerging manifestations of cesarean scar defect in reproductive women. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2016; 23 (06) 893-902 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2016.06.020
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Bij de Vaate AJ, van der Voet LF, Naji O. , et al. Prevalence, potential risk factors for development and symptoms related to the presence of uterine niches following Cesarean section: systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 43 (04) 372-382 Doi: 10.1002/uog.13199
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Indraccolo U, Scutiero G, Matteo M, Indraccolo SR, Greco P. Cesarean section on maternal request: should it be formally prohibited in Italy?. Ann Ist Super Sanita 2015; 51 (02) 162-166 Doi: 10.4415/ANN_15_02_15
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Zhang J, Gülmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: global, regional and national estimates: 1990–2014. PLoS One 2016; 11 (02) e0148343 Doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148343
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Alonso BD, Silva FMBD, Latorre MDRDO, Diniz CSG, Bick D. Caesarean birth rates in public and privately funded hospitals: a cross-sectional study. Rev Saude Publica 2017; 51: 101 Doi: 10.11606/S1518-8787.2017051007054
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Vervoort AJ, Uittenbogaard LB, Hehenkamp WJ, Brölmann HA, Mol BW, Huirne JA. Why do niches develop in Caesarean uterine scars? Hypotheses on the aetiology of niche development. Hum Reprod 2015; 30 (12) 2695-2702 Doi: 10.1093/humrep/dev240
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Di Spiezio Sardo A, Saccone G, McCurdy R, Bujold E, Bifulco G, Berghella V. Risk of Cesarean scar defect following single- vs double-layer uterine closure: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 50 (05) 578-583 Doi: 10.1002/uog.17401
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Poidevin LO. The value of hysterography in the prediction of cesarean section wound defects. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1961; 81: 67-71 Doi: 10.1016/S0002-9378(16)36308-6
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Bij de Vaate AJ, Brölmann HA, van der Voet LF, van der Slikke JW, Veersema S, Huirne JA. Ultrasound evaluation of the Cesarean scar: relation between a niche and postmenstrual spotting. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 37 (01) 93-99 Doi: 10.1002/uog.8864
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 van der Voet LLF, Limperg T, Veersema S. , et al. Niches after cesarean section in a population seeking hysteroscopic sterilization. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2017; 214: 104-108 Doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.05.004
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Tower AM, Frishman GN. Cesarean scar defects: an underrecognized cause of abnormal uterine bleeding and other gynecologic complications. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2013; 20 (05) 562-572 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2013.03.008
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Osser OV, Jokubkiene L, Valentin L. Cesarean section scar defects: agreement between transvaginal sonographic findings with and without saline contrast enhancement. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010; 35 (01) 75-83 Doi: 10.1002/uog.7496
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Zimmer EZ, Bardin R, Tamir A, Bronshtein M. Sonographic imaging of cervical scars after Cesarean section. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 23 (06) 594-598 Doi: 10.1002/uog.1033
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Vikhareva Osser O, Valentin L. Risk factors for incomplete healing of the uterine incision after caesarean section. BJOG 2010; 117 (09) 1119-1126 Doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02631.x
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Raimondo G, Grifone G, Raimondo D, Seracchioli R, Scambia G, Masciullo V. Hysteroscopic treatment of symptomatic cesarean-induced isthmocele: a prospective study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2015; 22 (02) 297-301 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2014.09.011
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Caesarean Section: Evidence Update March 2013: Evidence Update 35. Manchester: NICE; 2013
  Google Scholar
• 17 Abalos E, Addo V, Brocklehurst P. , et al; CORONIS Collaborative Group. Caesarean section surgical techniques (CORONIS): a fractional, factorial, unmasked, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2013; 382 (9888): 234-248 Doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60441-9
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 CAESAR study collaborative group. Caesarean section surgical techniques: a randomised factorial trial (CAESAR). BJOG 2010; 117 (11) 1366-1376 Doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02686.x
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Roberge S, Demers S, Berghella V, Chaillet N, Moore L, Bujold E. Impact of single- vs double-layer closure on adverse outcomes and uterine scar defect: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 211 (05) 453-460 Doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.06.014
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Bamberg C, Hinkson L, Dudenhausen JW, Bujak V, Kalache KD, Henrich W. Longitudinal transvaginal ultrasound evaluation of cesarean scar niche incidence and depth in the first two years after single- or double-layer uterotomy closure: a randomized controlled trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2017; 96 (12) 1484-1489 Doi: 10.1111/aogs.13213
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Ceci O, Cantatore C, Scioscia M. , et al. Ultrasonographic and hysteroscopic outcomes of uterine scar healing after cesarean section: comparison of two types of single-layer suture. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2012; 38 (11) 1302-1307 Doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2012.01872.x
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Scioscia M, Iannone P, Morano D, Pontrelli G, Greco P. Comment on “Longitudinal transvaginal ultrasound evaluation of cesarean scar niche incidence and depth in the first two years after single- or double-layer uterotomy closure: a randomized controlled trial”. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2018; 97 (05) 629 Doi: 10.1111/aogs.13278
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Awonuga AO, Fletcher NM, Saed GM, Diamond MP. Postoperative adhesion development following cesarean and open intra-abdominal gynecological operations: a review. Reprod Sci 2011; 18 (12) 1166-1185 Doi: 10.1177/1933719111414206
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Morris H. Surgical pathology of the lower uterine segment caesarean section scar: is the scar a source of clinical symptoms?. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1995; 14 (01) 16-20 Doi: 10.1097/00004347-199501000-00004
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Setubal A, Alves J, Osório F. , et al. Treatment for uterine isthmocele, a pouch-like defect at the site of cesarean section scar. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2018; 25 (01) 38-46 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.09.022
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Fabres C, Aviles G, De La Jara C. , et al. The cesarean delivery scar pouch: clinical implications and diagnostic correlation between transvaginal sonography and hysteroscopy. J Ultrasound Med 2003; 22 (07) 695-700, quiz 701–702 Doi: 10.7863/jum.2003.22.7.695
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Wang CJ, Huang HJ, Chao A, Lin YP, Pan YJ, Horng SG. Challenges in the transvaginal management of abnormal uterine bleeding secondary to cesarean section scar defect. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2011; 154 (02) 218-222 Doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2010.10.016
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Thurmond AS, Harvey WJ, Smith SA. Cesarean section scar as a cause of abnormal vaginal bleeding: diagnosis by sonohysterography. J Ultrasound Med 1999; 18 (01) 13-16, quiz 17–18 Doi: 10.7863/jum.1999.18.1.13
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Matteo M, Cicinelli E, Neri M. , et al. Pro-inflammatory M1/Th1 type immune network and increased expression of TSG-6 in the eutopic endometrium from women with endometriosis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2017; 218: 99-105 Doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.08.014
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 Cicinelli E, Matteo M, Tinelli R. , et al. Prevalence of chronic endometritis in repeated unexplained implantation failure and the IVF success rate after antibiotic therapy. Hum Reprod 2015; 30 (02) 323-330 Doi: 10.1093/humrep/deu292
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Scutiero G, Iannone P, Bernardi G. , et al. Oxidative stress and endometriosis: a systematic review of the literature. Oxid Med Cell Longev 2017; 2017: 7265238 Doi: 10.1155/2017/7265238
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 32 Diaz-Garcia C, Estellés JG, Escrivá AM, Mora JJ, Torregrosa RR, Sancho JM. Scar abscess six years after cesarean section: Laparoscopic and hysteroscopic management. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2009; 16 (06) 785-788 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2009.07.020
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 33 Chen HY, Chen SJ, Hsieh FJ. Observation of cesarean section scar by transvaginal ultrasonography. Ultrasound Med Biol 1990; 16 (05) 443-447
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Borges LM, Scapinelli A, de Baptista Depes D, Lippi UG, Coelho Lopes RG. Findings in patients with postmenstrual spotting with prior cesarean section. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2010; 17 (03) 361-364 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2010.02.007
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 35 Donnez O, Donnez J, Orellana R, Dolmans MM. Gynecological and obstetrical outcomes after laparoscopic repair of a cesarean scar defect in a series of 38 women. Fertil Steril 2017; 107 (01) 289-296.e2 Doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.09.033
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 36 Indraccolo U, Scutiero G, Matteo M, Mastricci AL, Barone I, Greco P. Correlations between sonographically measured and actual incision site thickness of lower uterine segment after repeated caesarean section. Minerva Ginecol 2015; 67 (03) 225-229
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 37 Vikhareva Osser O, Valentin L. Clinical importance of appearance of cesarean hysterotomy scar at transvaginal ultrasonography in nonpregnant women. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 117 (03) 525-532 Doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318209abf0
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 38 Ofili-Yebovi D, Ben-Nagi J, Sawyer E. , et al. Deficient lower-segment Cesarean section scars: prevalence and risk factors. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008; 31 (01) 72-77 Doi: 10.1002/uog.5200 PubMed
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 39 Zilberman A, Sharf M, Polishuk WZ. Evaluation of cesarean section scar by hysterography. Obstet Gynecol 1968; 32 (02) 153-157
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 40 Monteagudo A, Carreno C, Timor-Tritsch IE. Saline infusion sonohysterography in nonpregnant women with previous cesarean delivery: the “niche” in the scar. J Ultrasound Med 2001; 20 (10) 1105-1115 Doi: 10.7863/jum.2001.20.10.1105
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 41 Reiter M, Schwope R. Finding a niche: Magnetic resonance imaging located an often-overlooked source of uterine bleeding. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 210 (02) 171.e1-171.e2 Doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.06.002
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 42 Di Spiezio Sardo A, Zizolfi B, Calagna G, Giampaolino P, Paolella F, Bifulco G. Hysteroscopic isthmoplasty: step by step technique. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2018; 25 (02) 338-339 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.09.002
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 43 Rock JA, Jones III HW. Te Lynde's Operative Gynecology. 10th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008
  Google Scholar
• 44 Florio P, Gubbini G, Marra E. , et al. A retrospective case-control study comparing hysteroscopic resection versus hormonal modulation in treating menstrual disorders due to isthmocele. Gynecol Endocrinol 2011; 27 (06) 434-438 Doi: 10.3109/09513590.2010.495431
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 45 Zhang X, Yang M, Wang Q, Chen J, Ding J, Hua K. Prospective evaluation of five methods used to treat cesarean scar defects. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2016; 134 (03) 336-339 Doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2016.04.011
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 46 Tahara M, Shimizu T, Shimoura H. Preliminary report of treatment with oral contraceptive pills for intermenstrual vaginal bleeding secondary to a cesarean section scar. Fertil Steril 2006; 86 (02) 477-479 Doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.01.020
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 47 Indraccolo U, Greco P, Scutiero G. , et al. The role of hysteroscopy in the diagnostic work-up of infertile asymptomatic patients. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 2014; 41 (02) 124-127 Doi: 10.12891/ceog16562014
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 48 Indraccolo U, Di Iorio R, Matteo M, Corona G, Greco P, Indraccolo SR. The pathogenesis of endometrial polyps: a systematic semi-quantitative review. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2013; 34 (01) 5-22
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 49 Scutiero G, Nappi L, Matteo M, Balzano S, Macarini L, Greco P. Cervical pregnancy treated by uterine artery embolisation combined with office hysteroscopy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2013; 166 (01) 104-106 Doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.10.013
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 50 Abacjew-Chmylko A, Wydra DG, Olszewska H. Hysteroscopy in the treatment of uterine cesarean section scar diverticulum: A systematic review. Adv Med Sci 2017; 62 (02) 230-239 Doi: 10.1016/j.advms.2017.01.004
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 51 Li C, Guo Y, Liu Y, Cheng J, Zhang W. Hysteroscopic and laparoscopic management of uterine defects on previous cesarean delivery scars. J Perinat Med 2014; 42 (03) 363-370 Doi: 10.1515/jpm-2013-0081
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 52 Chang Y, Tsai EM, Long CY, Lee CL, Kay N. Resectoscopic treatment combined with sonohysterographic evaluation of women with postmenstrual bleeding as a result of previous cesarean delivery scar defects. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009; 200 (04) 370.e1-370.e4 Doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.11.038
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 53 Feng YL, Li MX, Liang XQ, Li XM. Hysteroscopic treatment of postcesarean scar defect. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2012; 19 (04) 498-502 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2012.03.010
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 54 Gubbini G, Casadio P, Marra E. Resectoscopic correction of the “isthmocele” in women with postmenstrual abnormal uterine bleeding and secondary infertility. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2008; 15 (02) 172-175 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2007.10.004
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 55 Fabres C, Arriagada P, Fernández C, Mackenna A, Zegers F, Fernández E. Surgical treatment and follow-up of women with intermenstrual bleeding due to cesarean section scar defect. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2005; 12 (01) 25-28 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2004.12.023
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 56 Xie H, Wu Y, Yu F, He M, Cao M, Yao S. A comparison of vaginal surgery and operative hysteroscopy for the treatment of cesarean-induced isthmocele: a retrospective review. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2014; 77 (02) 78-83 Doi: 10.1159/000356961
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 57 Gubbini G, Centini G, Nascetti D. , et al. Surgical hysteroscopic treatment of cesarean-induced isthmocele in restoring fertility: prospective study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2011; 18 (02) 234-237 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2010.10.011
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 58 Florio P, Filippeschi M, Moncini I, Marra E, Franchini M, Gubbini G. Hysteroscopic treatment of the cesarean-induced isthmocele in restoring infertility. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2012; 24 (03) 180-186 Doi: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283521202
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 59 Luo L, Niu G, Wang Q, Xie HZ, Yao SZ. Vaginal repair of cesarean section scar diverticula. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2012; 19 (04) 454-458 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2012.03.012
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 60 Schepker N, Garcia-Rocha GJ, von Versen-Höynck F, Hillemanns P, Schippert C. Clinical diagnosis and therapy of uterine scar defects after caesarean section in non-pregnant women. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2015; 291 (06) 1417-1423 Doi: 10.1007/s00404-014-3582-0
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 61 Nappi L, Pontis A, Sorrentino F, Greco P, Angioni S. Hysteroscopic metroplasty for the septate uterus with diode laser: a pilot study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2016; 206: 32-35 Doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.08.035
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 62 Nappi L, Sorrentino F, Angioni S, Pontis A, Greco P. The use of laser in hysteroscopic surgery. Minerva Ginecol 2016; 68 (06) 722-726
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 63 Nappi L, Sorrentino F, Angioni S, Pontis A, Litta P, Greco P. Feasibility of hysteroscopic endometrial polypectomy using a new dual wavelengths laser system (DWLS): preliminary results of a pilot study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2017; 295 (01) 3-7 Doi: 10.1007/s00404-016-4232-5
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 64 Klemm P, Koehler C, Mangler M, Schneider U, Schneider A. Laparoscopic and vaginal repair of uterine scar dehiscence following cesarean section as detected by ultrasound. J Perinat Med 2005; 33 (04) 324-331
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 65 Chen Y, Chang Y, Yao S. Transvaginal management of cesarean scar section diverticulum: a novel surgical treatment. Med Sci Monit 2014; 20: 1395-1399 Doi: 10.12659/MSM.890642
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 66 Pomorski M, Fuchs T, Rosner-Tenerowicz A, Zimmer M. Sonographic evaluation of surgical repair of uterine cesarean scar defects. J Clin Ultrasound 2017; 45 (08) 455-460 Doi: 10.1002/jcu.22449
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 67 Jeremy B, Bonneau C, Guillo E. , et al. [Uterine ishtmique transmural hernia: results of its repair on symptoms and fertility]. Gynécol Obstét Fertil 2013; 41 (10) 588-596 Doi: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2013.08.005
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 68 Jacobson MT, Osias J, Velasco A, Charles R, Nezhat C. Laparoscopic repair of a uteroperitoneal fistula. JSLS 2003; 7 (04) 367-369
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 69 Donnez O, Jadoul P, Squifflet J, Donnez J. Laparoscopic repair of wide and deep uterine scar dehiscence after cesarean section. Fertil Steril 2008; 89 (04) 974-980 Doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.04.024
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 70 Yalcinkaya TM, Akar ME, Kammire LD, Johnston-MacAnanny EB, Mertz HL. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic repair of symptomatic cesarean scar defect: a report of two cases. J Reprod Med 2011; 56 (5-6): 265-270
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 71 Liu SJ, Lv W, Li W. Laparoscopic repair with hysteroscopy of cesarean scar diverticulum. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2016; 42 (12) 1719-1723 Doi: 10.1111/jog.13146
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 72 Bakavičiūtė G, Špiliauskaitė S, Meškauskienė A, Ramašauskaitė D. Laparoscopic repair of the uterine scar defect - successful treatment of secondary infertility: a case report and literature review. Acta Med Litu 2016; 23 (04) 227-231 Doi: 10.6001/actamedica.v23i4.3424
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 73 van der Voet L, Vervoort A, Veersman S. BijdeVaate A, Brolmann H, Huirne J. Minimally invasive therapy for gynaecological symptoms related to a niche in the cesarean scar: a systematic review. BJOG 2014; 121: 145-156 Doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12537
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 74 Suarez Salvador E, Haladjian MC, Bradbury M. , et al. Laparoscopic isthmocele repair with hysteroscopic assistance. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2018; 25 (04) 576-577 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.10.005
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 75 Urman B, Arslan T, Aksu S, Taskiran C. Laparoscopic repair of cesarean scar defect “isthmocele”. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2016; 23 (06) 857-858 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2016.03.012
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 76 Akdemir A, Sahin C, Ari SA, Ergenoglu M, Ulukus M, Karadadas N. Determination of isthmocele with using a foley catether during laparoscopic repair of caesarean scar defect. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2018; 25 (01) 21-22 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.05.017
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 77 Sipahi S, Sasaki K, Miller CE. The minimally invasive approach to the symptomatic isthmocele - what does the literature say? A step-by-step primer on laparoscopic isthmocele - excision and repair. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2017; 29 (04) 257-265 Doi: 10.1097/GCO.0000000000000380
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 78 Vervoort A, Vissers J, Hehenkamp W, Brölmann H, Huirne J. The effect of laparoscopic resection of large niches in the uterine caesarean scar on symptoms, ultrasound findings and quality of life: a prospective cohort study. BJOG 2018; 125 (03) 317-325 Doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.14822
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 79 Api M, Boza A, Gorgen H, Api O. Should cesarean scar defect be trated laparoscopically? A case report and review of literature. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2015; 22 (07) 1145-1152 Doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2015.06.013
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar