270 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27064944)
1. Cesarean section scar measurements in non-pregnant women using three-dimensional ultrasound: a repeatability study.
Glavind J; Madsen LD; Uldbjerg N; Dueholm M
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2016 Jun; 201():65-9. PubMed ID: 27064944
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Reproducibility of three-dimensional ultrasound for the measurement of a niche in a caesarean scar and assessment of its shape.
Marjolein Bij de Vaate AJ; Linskens IH; van der Voet LF; Twisk JW; Brölmann HA; Huirne JA
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2015 May; 188():39-44. PubMed ID: 25770846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Two- and three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound in assessment of the impact of selected obstetric risk factors on cesarean scar niche formation: the case-controlled study.
Budny-Winska J; Zimmer-Stelmach A; Pomorski M
Ginekol Pol; 2021; 92(5):378-382. PubMed ID: 33757154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Standardized ultrasonographic approach for the assessment of risk factors of incomplete healing of the cesarean section scar in the uterus.
Pomorski M; Fuchs T; Rosner-Tenerowicz A; Zimmer M
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2016 Oct; 205():141-5. PubMed ID: 27591715
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Morphology of the cesarean section scar in the non-pregnant uterus after one elective cesarean section.
Pomorski M; Fuchs T; Rosner-Tenerowicz A; Zimmer M
Ginekol Pol; 2017; 88(4):174-179. PubMed ID: 28509317
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Impact of selected risk factors on uterine healing after cesarean section in women with single-layer uterine closure: A prospective study using two- and three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasonography.
Budny-Wińska J; Zimmer-Stelmach A; Pomorski M
Adv Clin Exp Med; 2022 Jan; 31(1):41-48. PubMed ID: 34738347
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Long-term complications of caesarean section. The niche in the scar: a prospective cohort study on niche prevalence and its relation to abnormal uterine bleeding.
van der Voet LF; Bij de Vaate AM; Veersema S; Brölmann HA; Huirne JA
BJOG; 2014 Jan; 121(2):236-44. PubMed ID: 24373597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessment of Cesarean hysterotomy scar in non-pregnant women: reliability of transvaginal sonography with and without contrast enhancement.
Baranov A; Gunnarsson G; Salvesen KÅ; Isberg PE; Vikhareva O
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Apr; 47(4):499-505. PubMed ID: 25720922
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Ultrasound evaluation of Cesarean scar after single- and double-layer uterotomy closure: a cohort study.
Glavind J; Madsen LD; Uldbjerg N; Dueholm M
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2013 Aug; 42(2):207-12. PubMed ID: 23288683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Transvaginal Sonographic Evaluation of Cesarean Section Scar Niche in Pregnancy: A Prospective Longitudinal Study.
Savukyne E; Machtejeviene E; Paskauskas S; Ramoniene G; Nadisauskiene RJ
Medicina (Kaunas); 2021 Oct; 57(10):. PubMed ID: 34684128
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Prediction of uterine dehiscence using ultrasonographic parameters of cesarean section scar in the nonpregnant uterus: a prospective observational study.
Pomorski M; Fuchs T; Zimmer M
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2014 Oct; 14():365. PubMed ID: 25733122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Reproducibility of assessment of full-dilatation Cesarean section scar in women undergoing second-trimester screening for preterm birth.
Banerjee A; Al-Dabbach Z; Bredaki FE; Casagrandi D; Tetteh A; Greenwold N; Ivan M; Jurkovic D; David AL; Napolitano R
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2022 Sep; 60(3):396-403. PubMed ID: 35809243
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The association between gynecological complaints and the uterine sonographic features in women with a history of cesarean section.
Kellner H; Horky A; Louwen F; Bahlmann F; Al Naimi A
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2024 Jul; 310(1):485-491. PubMed ID: 38695973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Visibility and measurement of cesarean section scars in pregnancy: a reproducibility study.
Naji O; Daemen A; Smith A; Abdallah Y; Saso S; Stalder C; Sayasneh A; McIndoe A; Ghaem-Maghami S; Timmerman D; Bourne T
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2012 Nov; 40(5):549-56. PubMed ID: 22323065
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Cesarean Scar Thickness Decreases during Pregnancy: A Prospective Longitudinal Study.
Savukyne E; Machtejeviene E; Kliucinskas M; Paskauskas S
Medicina (Kaunas); 2022 Mar; 58(3):. PubMed ID: 35334583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Cesarean scar thickness in non-pregnant women as a risk factor for uterine rupture.
Risager JK; Uldbjerg N; Glavind J
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2022 Jan; 35(2):389-394. PubMed ID: 31992102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Ultrasonographic analysis of cesarean scars features in nonpregnant uterus].
Zimmer M; Pomorski M; Fuchs T; Tomiałowicz M; Michniewicz J; Wiatrowski A; Mikołajczyk K
Ginekol Pol; 2007 Nov; 78(11):842-6. PubMed ID: 18306913
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Does the appearance of the cutaneous scar after cesarean section reflect the residual myometrial thickness?
Al Naimi A; Mouzakiti N; Eißmann C; Louwen F; Bahlmann F
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2021 Mar; 303(3):847-851. PubMed ID: 33415438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Ultrasound evaluation of uterine scar after Cesarean section and next birth.
Basic E; Basic-Cetkovic V; Kozaric H; Rama A
Med Arch; 2012; 66(3 Suppl 1):41-4. PubMed ID: 22937691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Sonographic evaluation of surgical repair of uterine cesarean scar defects.
Pomorski M; Fuchs T; Rosner-Tenerowicz A; Zimmer M
J Clin Ultrasound; 2017 Oct; 45(8):455-460. PubMed ID: 28186617
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
