The role of multimodality imaging after cesarean delivery
Abstract
There has been a global increase in the rate of cesarean delivery during the last 30 years. As a result, many women of reproductive age now have uterine scars. Well-recognized obstetric and gynecologic consequences include cesarean scar pregnancy, scar dehiscence or rupture, and scar endometriosis. More recently, abnormal menstrual bleeding, pelvic pain, and secondary infertility have been reported as a consequence of cesarean delivery. This article reviews the range of normal imaging findings after cesarean delivery, as well as the imaging manifestations of complications, both acute and chronic.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
High-frequency linear transducers are best for ultrasound assessment of scar endometriosis.
“High-frequency linear transducers are best for such assessment [13].”
From Abdominal Wall Endometriosis: Two Case Reports and Literature Review (2020) · cites this paper as [13]
Cites
Imaging in the Diagnosis of Juvenile Nasopharyngeal Angiofibroma
Mishra, S., Praveena, N. M., Panigrahi, R., et al. (2013) · Journal of Clinical Imaging Science · doi:10.4103/2156-7514.109469 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Magnetic Resonance Imaging as an Adjunct to Ultrasound in Evaluating Cesarean Scar Ectopic Pregnancy
Wu, R. L., Klein, M. A., Mahboob, S., et al. (2013) · Journal of Clinical Imaging Science · doi:10.4103/2156-7514.109758 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Endometriosis in the Uterine Wall Cesarean Section Scar
Kafkash, A. S. E., Franklin, R. R., & Sauls, D. (2010) · Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation · doi:10.1159/000291962 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Endometriosis of the uterine cesarean section scar: A case report
Lahiri, A. K., Sharma, K., & Busiri, N. (2008) · Indian journal of radiology and imaging - new series/Indian journal of radiology and imaging/Indian Journal of Radiology & Imaging · doi:10.4103/0971-3026.37111 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Abdominal Wall Endometriosis: Two Case Reports and Literature Review
Doroftei, B., Armeanu, T., Maftei, R., Ilie, O.-D., Dabuleanu, A.-M., & Condac, C. (2020) · Medicina · doi:10.3390/medicina56120727 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
“High-frequency linear transducers are best for such assessment [13].”
Background
- Authors
- Rezvani, M., Shaaban, A. M., & Kennedy, A. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Utah (US)
- Venue
- Ultrasound Quarterly
- Published
- 2015-03
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 5-18
- ISSN
- 0894-8771 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2325282751
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 1.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Ultrasound Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gynecological conditions and treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Maternal and fetal healthcare
- Keywords
- cesarean section, cesarean section scar, multimodal imaging, cesarean scar pregnancy, uterine scar dehiscence, scar endometriosis, abnormal menstrual bleeding, pelvic pain, secondary infertility, postpartum complications
- MeSH terms
- Cesarean Section, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Genital Diseases, Female, Humans, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Multimodal Imaging
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
