Journal of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +1 (202) 780-3397

Opinion Article - Journal of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (2022) Volume 6, Issue 6

Utilizing laparoscopy and hysteroscopy to treat Caesarean scar absconds: An orderly survey and meta-analysis

Hedan Wang*

Department of Department of Gynecology, Zhejiang Chinese Medicine University, Hangzhou 310012, China

Corresponding Author:
Department of Department of Gynaecology
Zhejiang Chinese Medicine University, Hangzhou 310012, China.

Received: 23-May-2022, Manuscript No. AABIB-22-65564; Editor assigned: 25-May-2022, Pre QC No. AABIB-22-65564(PQ); Reviewed: 08-Jun-2022, QC No. AABIB-22-65564; Revised: 14-Jun-2022; AABIB-22-65564(R); Published: 21-Jun-2022, DOI: 10.35841/aabib-6.6.130

Citation: Wang H. Utilizing laparoscopy and hysteroscopy to treat Cesarean scar absconds: A orderly survey and meta-analysis. J Biomed Imag Bioeng. 2022;6(6):130

Visit for more related articles at Journal of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering


Rising cesarean segment rates have driven to an increment in cesarean scar absconds. In any case, there's no agreement with respect to the gold standard for treating cesarean scar abandons. This consider points to compare the adequacy of laparoscopy combined with hysteroscopy and hysteroscopy in treating cesarean scar abandons.


Laparoscopy, Hysteroscopy, Cesarean scar defect.


Over the past few decades, worldwide cesarean conveyance rates have expanded, which has pulled in significant attention. This increment is closely related to the rising number of post-surgical complications. One of the foremost common complications is cesarean scar deformity (CSD). Uterine scarring after caesarean section is depicted within the writing as “diverticulum”, “niche”, or “caesarean scar defect”. CSDs were characterized by the advancement of wedge-shaped anatomic changes amid the mending handle. The most indications for looking for restorative counsel are irregular uterine dying, agonizing feminine cycle, pelvic torment, dyspareunia, and infertility. The determination of CSD essentially depends on commonplace clinical appearances, ultrasonography, or MRI. At show, there's no agreement with respect to the gold standard for treating CSDs. The major treatment for post-CSDs is hormone drugs or surgeries. [1].

Verbal contraceptives are appropriate for patients who are incapable to endure surgery. Indications are incidentally reduced, whereas the dangers of diverticulum remain. The operation incorporates hysteroscopy, laparoscopy, laparoscopy combined with hysteroscopy, and transvaginal repair. Be that as it may, there's no prove to show which procedure ought to be chosen. Hysteroscopy can outwardly watch the uterine depression. And after the repair, it makes a difference to confirm the result of the segment. This meta- analysis points to compare the adequacy of laparoscopy combined with hysteroscopy vs. hysteroscopy in treating CSD based on current prove. Ponders that surveyed laparoscopy and hysteroscopy to treat CSDs were qualified for consideration. Due to the scarcity of the accessible information, we included review, cohort, and case-control ponders, as well as thinks about with a single treatment gather and treatment control bunches considers comparing hysteroscopy and laparoscopy combined with hysteroscopy. Consideration criteria were patients who had one past caesarean area, symptomatic, anomalous uterine dying, dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, and barrenness. Prohibition criteria were asymptomatic patients [2].

CSDs are common in patients with cesarean segment. The predominance of CSD was between 56% and 84% agreeing to rules for the choice of agent strategies. In this audit, we found that there was no distinction in monthly cycle length after surgery between the two bunches. Patients within the hysteroscopy bunch experienced shorter agent time and less blood loss. Since numerous CSDs happen in reproductive-age ladies who crave future pregnancies, pregnancy and RMT after surgery are two critical indexes. A few thinks about respected RMT as an record of the hazard of uterine break amid the following pregnancy, and a report has demonstrated that RMT <2 mm has been confirmed to extend uterine rupture.18 Laparoscopic combined with hysteroscopic repair has been prescribed as palatable anatomic results when RMT is less than
2.5 mm. Be that as it may, the current accessible writing needs adequate prove for us to state that laparoscopy combined with hysteroscopic repair is predominant to hysteroscopic repair in terms of future ripeness and RMT after surgery [3].

Laparoscopy combined with hysteroscopy is an successful treatment for CSD. This sort of strategy offers numerous points of interest. To begin with, amid laparoscopy combined with hysteroscopic repair, CSD can be completely uncovered with the bladder pushing descending and diminish iatrogenic bladder injury. Moment, laparoscopy can straightforwardly watch the pelvic depth, at the same time treating the ovary, uterine fibroids, and partitioned grips. Third, the hysteroscopic light source can accurately find the run and estimate of CSD. After laparoscopy, the surgical condition is inspected by means of hysteroscopy, hence diminishing clinical complications. Be that as it may, this method is expensive and requires longer agent time, and the working specialist must be commonplace with the hysteroscope and laparoscope. One ponder detailed for that ladies with RMT <2.5 mm and those wanting assist richness, laparoscopy combined with hysteroscopy produces great results [4]. Hysteroscopy resects fibrotic tissue, progressing menstrual waste and maintaining a strategic distance from blood accumulation. It encourages menstrual stream through the cervix. For ladies with RMT ≥2.5 mm who don't want future pregnancies, hysteroscopy can diminish their clinical symptoms.9 Due to shorter agent time and less blood misfortune, hysteroscopy can be performed in patients with RMT ≥2.5 mm.21 Be that as it may, hysteroscopy cannot illuminate ripeness issues. The significance of hysteroscopy examination some time recently and after surgery can be key for laparoscopy combined with hysteroscopy. Our in quire about needed randomized trials and our test sizes were as well little. Diverse reports and nations have shifting surgical benchmarks for uterine scar diverticulum. The surgical method moreover contributes to this study's heterogeneity. We are not permitted to separate into test bunch (laparoscopy combined with hysteroscopy and control bunch arbitrarily in clinical hone, this may include moral issues.

In conclusion, patients with CSD ought to select the suitable method considering their age, RMT, crave for advance richness, and gynecological irritation. The current think about needed prove to demonstrate that laparoscopy combined with hysteroscopy is predominant to hysteroscopy, advance ponders are suggested [5].


  1. Surapaneni K, Silberzweig JE. Cesarean section scar diverticulum: Appearance on hysterosalpingography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190(4):870-74.
  2. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  3. Borges LM, Scapinelli AD, Lippi UG, et al. Findings in patients with postmenstrual spotting with prior cesarean section. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010;17(3):361-64.
  4. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  5. Tower AM, Frishman GN. Cesarean scar defects: An underrecognized cause of abnormal uterine bleeding and other gynecologic complications. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2013;20(5):562-72.
  6. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  7. van der Voet LF, Vervoort AJ, Veersema S, et al. Minimally invasive therapy for gynaecological symptoms related to a niche in the caesarean scar: A systematic review. BJOG. 2014;121(2):145-56.
  8. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  9. Li C, Guo Y, Liu Y, Cheng J, et al. Hysteroscopic and laparoscopic management of uterine defects on previous cesarean delivery scars. J Perinat Med. 2014;42(3):363-70.
  10. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Get the App