About
The Journal "Obstetrics and Gynecology"Journal HistoryAims and ScopePolicies on Conflict of Interest, Human and Animal Rights, and Informed ConsentEditorial ProcessData sharing statementAdvertising PolicyThe Process for Handling Cases Requiring Corrections, Retractions, and Editorial Expressions of ConcernEditorial BoardEditorial CounsilInformation for ProfessionalsNewsContacts
ArchiveEthical StandardsSubscription
For authors
InstructionsInformed consent policyContract offerEASE GuidelinesICJME CriteriaWAME Recommendations on ChatGPT and Chatbots in Relation to Scholarly Publications
Reviewing
About
The Journal "Obstetrics and Gynecology"Journal HistoryAims and ScopePolicies on Conflict of Interest, Human and Animal Rights, and Informed ConsentEditorial ProcessData sharing statementAdvertising PolicyThe Process for Handling Cases Requiring Corrections, Retractions, and Editorial Expressions of ConcernEditorial BoardEditorial CounsilInformation for ProfessionalsNewsContacts
ArchiveEthical StandardsSubscription
For authors
InstructionsInformed consent policyContract offerEASE GuidelinesICJME CriteriaWAME Recommendations on ChatGPT and Chatbots in Relation to Scholarly Publications
Reviewing
Logout
Obstetrics and Gynegology2024№4
Uterine niches following cesarean section:...

Uterine niches following cesarean section: the problem of diagnosis and treatment

DOI
https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2023.235

Loginova E.A., Valiev R.K., Ivanova L.B., Davydova I.Yu., Dymova A.V.

A.S. Loginov Moscow Clinical Scientific Centre, Moscow Department of Health, Moscow, Russia

Currently, there is an increase in the frequency of cesarean sections, and the number of young fertile women with a scar on the uterus rises as well. The presence of any scar on the uterus is always a risk for reproductive complications. If there is a severe myometrial defect, it can lead to thinning of the myometrium of less than 3 mm and formation of a defect on the part of the uterine cavity (niche). This article discusses the issues of terminology, the causes of formation and the clinical consequences of the defects in the scar area. Uterine rupture along the scar during pregnancy and childbirth is a life-threatening complication that can occur in the absence of timely diagnosis and treatment of this pathology in women planning a pregnancy. Modern algorithms for diagnosis and choice of treatment tactics depending on the clinical and instrumental results of the examination are presented in the article. Ultrasound examination, sonography, MRI, hysteroscopy are the main methods for diagnosing pathology in the area of the uterine scar after cesarean section. Depending on the clinical symptoms, the patient’s reproductive plans and the location of the defect, both dynamic observation and surgical correction of the uterine scar are possible. Hysteroscopic niche resection and metroplasty are the main methods of surgical treatment of patients with uterine scar defects.
Conclusion: The comprehensive examination of women with a uterine scar after cesarean section, the combination of at least two examination methods (ultrasound and MRI) can significantly increase the accuracy and quality of diagnosing the condition of the postoperative uterine scar. The choice of treatment for defects in the area of the uterine scar after cesarean section depends on the severity of clinical symptoms, the woman’s reproductive plans, the characteristics and localization of the myometrial defect in the area of the scar. Reconstructive surgery on the uterus (metroplasty) makes it possible not only to improve the quality of a woman’s life and restore fertility, but most importantly it can reduce the risks of life – threatening complications during pregnancy.

Authors’ contributions: Loginova E.A., Ivanova L.B., Dymova A.V. – developing the concept and design of the study, collecting and processing the material, writing the text; Loginova E.A., Ivanova L.B. – collecting the material; Davydova I.Yu., Valiev R.K., Ivanova L.B. – editing the text.
Conflicts of interest: The authors declare no possible conflicts of interest.
Funding: The study was conducted without sponsorship.
For citation: Loginova E.A., Valiev R.K., Ivanova L.B., Davydova I.Yu.,
Dymova A.V. Uterine niches following cesarean section: the problem of diagnosis and treatment.
Akusherstvo i Ginekologiya/Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2024; (4): 24-32 (in Russian)
https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2023.235

Keywords

myometrial defect
niche
cesarean section
metroplasty
laparoscopy
robot-assisted surgery
Full text (in Russian)

References

  1. Павлова Т.Ю., Филиппова Р.Д., Крамарский В.А., Аргунов В.А. Комплексная оценка характера репаративных процессов в области разреза матки после кесарева сечения. Якутский медицинский журнал. 2008; (4): 37-40. [Pavlova T.Yu., Filippova R.D., Kramarskiy V.A., Argunov V.A. Complex assessment of pattern of reparative processes at the place of uterine incision after caesarean section. Yakut Medical Journal. 2008; (4): 37-40. (in Russian)].
  2. Щукина Н.А., Буянова С.Н., Чечнева М.А., Земскова Н.Ю., Пучкова Н.В., Барто Р.А., Баринова И.В., Благина Е.И. Причины формирования несостоятельного рубца на матке после кесарева сечения, роль дисплазии соединительной ткани Российский вестник акушера-гинеколога. 2018; 18(5): 4-11. [Shchukina N.A., Buianova S.N., Chechneva M.A., Zemskova N.Iu., Puchkova N.V., Barto R.A., Barinova I.V., Blagina E.I. Causes of a postcesarean incompetent uterine scar: a role of connective tissue dysplasia. Russian Bulletin of Obstetrician-Gynecologist. 2018; 18(5): 4-11. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.17116/rosakush2018180514.
  3. Мартынов С.А., Адамян Л.В. Рубец на матке после кесарева сечения: терминологические аспекты. Гинекология. 2020; 22(5): 70-5. [Martynov S.A., Adamyan L.V. Cesarean scar defect: terminological aspects. Gynecology. 2020; 22(5): 70-5. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.26442/20795696.2020.5.200415.
  4. Poidevin L.O. The value of hysterography in the prediction of cesarean section wound defects. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1961; 81: 67-71. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9378(16)36308-6.
  5. Chen H.Y., Chen S.J., Hsieh F.J. Observation of cesarean section scar by transvaginal ultrasonography. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 1990; 16(5): 443-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0301-5629(90)90166-a.
  6. 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(1): 16-20. doi: 10.1097/00004347-199501000-00004.
  7. Monteagudo A., Carreno C., Timor-Tritsch I.E. Saline infusion sonohysterography in nonpregnant women with previous cesarean delivery: the "niche" in the scar. J. Ultrasound Med. 2001; 20(10): 1105-15. https://dx.doi.org/10.7863/jum.2001.20.10.1105.
  8. Ofili-Yebovi D., Ben-Nagi J., Sawyer E., Yazbek J., Lee C., Gonzalez J., Jurkovic D. Deficient lower-segment Cesarean section scars: prevalence and risk factors. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2008; 31(1): 72-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.5200.
  9. Roberge S., Boutin A., Chaillet N., Moore L., Jastrow N., Demers S., Bujold E. Systematic review of cesarean scar assessment in the nonpregnant state: imaging techniques and uterine scar defect. Am. J. Perinatol. 2012; 29(6): 465-71. https://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1304829.
  10. Краснопольская К.В., Попов А.А., Чечнева М.А., Федоров А.А., Ершова И.Ю. Прегравидарная метропластика по поводу несостоятельного рубца на матке после кесарева сечения: влияние на естественную фертильность и результаты ЭКО. Проблемы репродукции. 2015; 3: 56-62. [Krasnopol'skaia K.V., Popov A.A., Chechneva M.A., Fedorov A.A., Ershova I.Yu. Preconceptional methroplastic operation in patients with uterine scar incompetence after Caesarian section: the influence on natural fertility and IVF outcomes. Russian Journal of Human Reproduction. 2015; 21(3): 56-62. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.17116/repro201521356-62.
  11. Макиян З.Н., Адамян Л.В., Карабач В.В., Чупрынин В.Д. Новый метод хирургического лечения несостоятельности рубца на матке после кесарева сечения с помощью внутриматочного манипулятора с желобом. Акушерство и гинекология. 2020; 2: 104-10. [Makiyan Z.N., Adamyan L.V., Karabach V.V., Chuprynin V.D. A new method for surgical treatment of uterine scar insuffisiency after a previous cesarean section using an intrauterine manipulator with a groove. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2020; (2): 104-10 (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2020.2.104-110.
  12. Аракелян А.С., Мартынов С.А., Хорошун Н.Д. и др. Диагностика и хирургическая коррекция несостоятельности рубца на матке после кесарева сечения с использованием лапароскопии и гистероскопии. В кн.: Сухих Г.Т., Адамян Л.В., ред. Материалы XXIX конгресса «Новые технологии в диагностике и лечении гинекологических заболеваний». Москва, 7–10 июня 2016 г. М.; 2016: 179-80. [Arakelyan A.S., Martynov S.A., Khoroshun N.D. et al. Diagnostics and surgical correction of uterine scarfailure after CS using laparoscopy and hysteroscopy. In: Sukhikh G.T., Adamyan L.V., ed. Materials of the XXIX Congress “New technologies in the diagnosis and treatment of gynecological diseases”. Moscow, June 7–10, 2016. Moscow; 2016: 179-80 (in Russian)].
  13. Vikhareva Osser O., Valentin L. Clinical importance of appearance of cesarean hysterotomy scar at transvaginal ultrasonography in nonpregnant women. Obstet. Gynecol. 2011; 117(3): 525-32. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e318209abf0.
  14. Jordans I.P.M., de Leeuw R.A., Stegwee S.I., Amso N.N., Barri-Soldevila P.N., van den Bosch T. et al. Sonographic examination of uterine niche in non-pregnant women: a modified Delphi procedure. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2019; 53(1): 107-15. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.19049.
  15. Попов А.А., Федоров А.А., Вроцкая В.С., Мананникова Т.Н., Тюрина С.С., Коваль А.А., Чечнева М.А., Логутова Л.С. Эндоскопические методы диагностики и хирургической коррекции несостоятельного рубца на матке после кесарева сечения. Акушерство и гинекология Санкт-Петербурга. 2016; (1): 54-7. [Popov A.A., Fedorov A.A., Vrotskaya V.S., Manannikova T.N., Tyurina S.S., Koval A.A., Chechneva M.A., Logutova L.S. Endoscopic diagnosis and surgical correction of the insolvent uterine scar after cesarean section. Obstetrics and Gynecology of St. Petersburg. 2016; (1): 54-7 (in Russian)].
  16. Jastrow N., Chaillet N., Roberge S., Morency A.M., Lacasse Y., Bujold E. Sonographic lower uterine segment thickness and risk of uterine scar defect: a systematic review. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Can. 2010; 32(4): 321-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1701-2163(16)34475-9.
  17. Bij de Vaate A.J., van der Voet L.F., Naji O., Witmer M., Veersema S., Brölmann H.A. et al. Prevalence, potential risk factors for development and symptoms related tothe presence of uterine niches following Cesarean section: systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2014; 43(4): 372-82. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.13199.
  18. Marjolein Bij de Vaate A.J., Linskens I.H., van der Voet L.F., Twisk J.W., Brölmann H.A., Huirne J.A. Reproducibility of three-dimensional ultrasound for the measurement of a niche in a caesarean scar and assessment of its shape. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2015; 188: 39-44. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2015.02.018.
  19. Vitale S.G., Ludwin A., Vilos G.A., Török P., Tesarik J., Vitagliano A. et al. From hysteroscopy to laparoendoscopic surgery: what is the best surgical approach for symptomatic isthmocele? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2020; 301(1): 33-52. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05438-0.
  20. Tang X., Wang J., Du Y., Xie M., Zhang H., Xu H., Hua K. Caesarean scar defect: Risk factors and comparison of evaluation efficacy between transvaginal sonography and magnetic resonance imaging. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2019; 242: 1-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.09.001.
  21. Пономарева Ю.Н., Логинова Е.А., Семенцова Н.А. Робот-ассистированная коррекция несостоятельного рубца на матке после кесарева сечения. Акушерство и гинекология. 2021; 10: 143-52. [Ponomareva Yu.N., Loginova E.A., Sementsova N.A. Robot-assisted correction of incompetent uterine scar after cesarean section. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2021; (10): 143-52 (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2021.10.143-152.
  22. Ножницева О.Н., Семенов И.А., Беженарь В.Ф. Рубец на матке после операции кесарева сечения и оптимальный алгоритм диагностики его состояния. Лучевая диагностика и терапия. 2019; 2: 85-90. [Nozhnitseva O.N., Semenov I.A., Bezhenar V.F. The scar on the uterus after cesarean section and the optimal algorithm for diagnostics. Diagnostic radiology and radiotherapy. 2019; (2): 85-90. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.22328/2079-5343-2019-10-2-85-90.
  23. Naji O., Wynants L., Smith A., Abdallah Y., Saso S., Stalder C. et al. Does the presence of a Caesarean section scar affect implantation site and early pregnancy outcome in women attending an early pregnancy assessment unit? Hum. Reprod. 2013; 28(6): 1489-96. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/det110.
  24. Bij de Vaate A.J., Brölmann H.A., van der Voet L.F., van der Slikke J.W., Veersema S., Huirne J.A. Ultrasound evaluation of the Cesarean scar: relation between a niche and postmenstrual spotting. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2011; 37(1): 93-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.8864.
  25. Erickson S.S., Van Voorhis B.J. Intermenstrual bleeding secondary to cesarean scar diverticuli: report of three cases. Obstet. Gynecol. 1999; 93(5 Pt 2): 802-5. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0029-7844(98)00314-7.
  26. Vissers J., Sluckin T.C., van Driel-Delprat C.C.R., Schats R., Groot C.J.M., Lambalk C.B. et al. Reduced pregnancy and live birth rates after in vitro fertilization in women with previous Caesarean section: a retrospective cohort study. Hum. Reprod. 2020; 35(3): 595-604. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dez295.
  27. Stewart K.S., Evans T.W. Recurrent bleeding from the lower segment scar--a late complication of Caesarean section. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 1975; 82(8): 682-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1975.tb00706.x.
  28. Vissers J., Hehenkamp W., Lambalk C.B., Huirne J.A. Post-Caesarean section niche-related impaired fertility: hypothetical mechanisms. Hum. Reprod. 2020; 35(7): 1484-94. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deaa094.
  29. Fitzpatrick K.E., Kurinczuk J.J., Alfirevic Z., Spark P., Brocklehurst P., Knight M. Uterine rupture by intended mode of delivery in the UK: a national case-control study. PLoS Med. 2012; 9(3): e1001184. https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001184.
  30. Savukyne E., Bykovaite-Stankeviciene R., Machtejeviene E., Nadisauskiene R., Maciuleviciene R. Symptomatic uterine rupture: a fifteen year review. Medicina (Kaunas). 2020; 56(11): 574. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina56110574.
  31. Kayani S.I., Alfirevic Z. Uterine rupture after induction of labour in women with previous caesarean section. BJOG. 2005; 112(4): 451-5. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00336.x.
  32. Kaplanoglu M., Bulbul M., Kaplanoglu D., Bakacak S.M. Effect of multiple repeat cesarean sections on maternal morbidity: data from southeast Turkey. Med. Sci. Monit. 2015; 21: 1447-53. https://dx.doi.org/10.12659/MSM.893333.
  33. van der Voet L.F., Vervoort A.J., Veersema S., BijdeVaate A.J., Brölmann H.A., Huirne J.A. Minimally invasive therapy for gynaecological symptoms related to a niche in the caesarean scar: a systematic review. BJOG. 2014; 121(2): 145-56. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.12537.
  34. Feng Y.L., Li M.X., Liang X.Q., Li X.M. Hysteroscopic treatment of postcesarean scar defect. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 2012; 19(4): 498-502. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2012.03.010.
  35. 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(2): 172-5. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2007.10.004.
  36. 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(2): 297-301. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2014.09.011.
  37. Vervoort A., Voet L.F., Hehenkamp W., Thurkow A.L., Kesteren P., Quartero H. et al. Hysteroscopic resection of a uterine caesarean scar defect (niche) in women with postmenstrual spotting: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG. 2018; 125(3): 326-34. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.14733.
  38. Zhu Q., He X., Jiang L., Liang G., Zhu Ch., Pan H. et al. Effectiveness of hysteroscopic resection of a uterine caesarean niche can be predicted: a prospective cohort study. Sci. Rep. 2020; 10(1): 17424. https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74622-8
  39. 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(4): 227-31. https://dx.doi.org/10.6001/actamedica.v23i4.3424.
  40. Dosedla E., Calda P. Outcomes of laparoscopic treatment in women with cesarean scar syndrome. Med. Sci. Monit. 2017; 23: 4061-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.12659/msm.902720.
  41. Zhang Y. A comparative study of transvaginal repair and laparoscopic repair in the management of patients with previous cesarean scar defect. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 2016; 23(4): 535-41. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2016.01.007.
  42. 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(2): 78-83. https://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000356961.
  43. Jacobson M.T., Osias J., Velasco A., Charles R., Nezhat C. Laparoscopic repair of a uteroperitoneal fistula. JSLS. 2003; 7(4): 367-9.
  44. Ciebiera M., Jakiel G., Słabuszewska-Jóźwiak A. Laparoscopic correction of the uterine muscle loss in the scar after a Caesarean section delivery. Wideochir. Inne. Tech. Maloinwazyjne. 2013; 8(4): 342-5. https://dx.doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2013.39514.
  45. Федоров А.А., Попов А.А., Чечнева М.А., Логутова Л.С., Щукина Н.А., Вроцкая В.С., Коваль А.А., Тюрина С.С., Ефремова Е.С., Беспалова А.Г. Ниша в рубце на матке после кесарева сечения. Диагностика, хирургическая тактика и исходы. Российский вестник акушера-гинеколога. 2021; 21(2): 50-5. [Fedorov A.A., Popov A.A., Chechneva M.A., Logutova L.S., Schukina N.A., Vrotskaya V.S., Koval’ A.A., Tyurina S.S., Efremova E.S., Bespalova A.G. Niche in the uterine scar after cesarean section. Diagnostics, surgical tactics and outcomes. Russian Bulletin of Obstetrician-Gynecologist. 2021; 21(2): 50-5. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.17116/rosakush20212102150.
  46. 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(3): 317-25. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.14822.
  47. Курцер М.А., Егикян Н.М., Савельева Н.А., Ватагина М.А., Писарская Е.С., Платицын И.В., Кутакова Ю.Ю., Логунова А.О. Оптимизация предгравидарной тактики ведения пациенток с дефектом рубца на матке после кесарева сечения. Акушерство и гинекология. 2021; 12: 68-75. [Kurtser M.A., Egikyan N.M., Savelyeva N.A., Vatagina M.A., Pisarskaya E.S., Platitsyn I.V., Kutakova Yu.Yu., Logunova A.O. Optimizing pre-pregnancy management of patients with post-cesarean section uterine scar. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2021; (12): 68-75 (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2021.12.68-75.
  48. Ye M., Zhang Q., Li Z., Gu C., Meng Y. Robotic CSP resection and hysterotomy repair. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 2021; 28(5): 945-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2020.11.017.
  49. Логинова Е.А., Пономарева Ю.Н., Давыдова И.Ю., Иванова Л.Б., Валиев Р.К. Робот-ассистированная метропластика. Акушерство и гинекология. 2022; 3: 129-37. [Loginova E.A., Ponomareva Yu.N., Davydova I.Yu., Ivanova L.B., Valiev R.K. Robot-assisted metroplasty. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2022; (3): 129-37 (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2022.3.129-137.
  50. Wang H.F., Chen H.H., Ting W.H., Lu H.F., Lin H.H., Hsiao S.M. Robotic or laparoscopic treatment of cesarean scar defects or cesarean scar pregnancies with a uterine sound guidance. Taiwan J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2021; 60(5): 821-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tjog.2021.07.007.
  51. 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(3): 336-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2016.04.011.
  52. Chen Y.Y., Tsai C.C., Lan K.C., Ou Y.C. Preliminary report on the use of a levonorgestrel intrauterine system for the treatment of intermenstrual bleeding due to previous cesarean delivery scar defect. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res. 2019; 45(10): 2015-20. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jog.14060.

Received 10.10.2023

Accepted 16.04.2024

About the Authors

Ekaterina A. Loginova, PhD, Researcher at the Laboratory of Gynecology, Department of Pelvic Oncology, A.S. Loginov Moscow Clinical Scientific and Practical Center, Moscow Healthcare Department, 111123, Russia, Moscow, Entuziastov Highway, 86, +7(495)304-30-35, +7(985)182-28-58, e.loginova@mknc.ru,
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5061-1227
Ramiz K. Valiev, PhD, Head of the Department of Pelvic Floor Oncology, A.S. Loginov Moscow Clinical Scientific and Practical Center, Moscow Healthcare Department, 111123, Russia, Moscow, Entuziastov Highway, 86, +7(495)304-30-35, r.valiev@mknc.ru
Larisa B. Ivanova, PhD, Head of the Laboratory of Gynecology, Pelvic Oncology Department, A.S. Loginov Moscow Clinical Scientific and Practical Center,
Moscow Healthcare Department, 111123, Russia, Moscow, Entuziastov Highway, 86, +7(495)304-30-35, l.ivanova@mknc.ru
Irina Yu. Davydova, Dr. Med. Sci., Leading Researcher, Department of Pelvic Floor Oncology, A.S. Loginov Moscow Clinical Scientific and Practical Center,
Moscow Healthcare Department, 111123, Russia, Moscow, Entuziastov Highway, 86, +7(495)304-30-35, i.davydova@mknc.ru
Alisa V. Dymova, obstetrician-gynecologist at the Department of Oncosurgery of the Pelvic Organs, A.S. Loginov Moscow Clinical Scientific and Practical Center,
Moscow Healthcare Department, 111123, Russia, Moscow, Enthusiastov Highway, 86, +7(495)304-30-35, а.dymova@mknc.ru

Similar Articles

№4 / 2023
Sukhareva T.A., Martynov S.A., Adamyan L.V., Kulabukhova E.A., Uchevatkina P.V., Letunovskaya A.B., Boykova Yu.V.
Comparing the effectiveness of ultrasound and MRI in assessing cesarean uterine scar defects
№2 / 2023
Dubrovina S.O., Berlim Yu.D., Aleksandrina A.D., Vovkochina M.A., Bogunova D.Yu., Gimbut V.S., Bozhinskaya D.M.
Modern ideas about the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis
№4 / 2024
Babich T.Yu., Sulima A.N., Baskakov P.N., Suleymanova S.R.
Delivery in a pregnant woman with a bicornuate uterus and a scar after cesarean section
№10 / 2023
Martynov S.A., Sukhareva T.A., Adamyan L.V.
Comparative effectiveness of different laparoscopic metroplasty techniques in patients with significant uterine scar defects after cesarean section
№3 / 2023
Mikheeva A.A., Yarygina T.A., Shmakov R.G., Kostyukov K.V., Rogachevsky O.V., Pyregov A.V.
Ultrasound criteria of uterine scar secondary to placenta accreta spectrum metroplasty and use of platelet-rich plasma
By continuing to use our site, you consent to the processing of cookies that ensure the proper functioning of the site.