133 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34077556)
1. The effect of the onset of labor on the characteristics of the cesarean scar.
Al Naimi A; Jennewein L; Mouzakiti N; Louwen F; Bahlmann F
Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2022 May; 157(2):322-326. PubMed ID: 34077556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Position and integrity of uterine scar are determined by degree of cervical dilatation at time of Cesarean section.
Kamel R; Eissa T; Sharaf M; Negm S; Thilaganathan B
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Mar; 57(3):466-470. PubMed ID: 32330331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Anatomy of the sonographic post-cesarean uterus.
Al Naimi A; Wolnicki B; Mouzakiti N; Reinbach T; Louwen F; Bahlmann F
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2021 Dec; 304(6):1485-1491. PubMed ID: 33891206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. 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]
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. Effect of cervical changes on the cesarean scar area and niche formation after preterm and term cesarean sections.
Dogru S; Akkus F; Altınordu Atcı A; Memnune Erdoğan K; Acar A
J Ultrasound; 2023 Sep; 26(3):717-724. PubMed ID: 36972013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Changes in Cesarean section scar dimensions during pregnancy: a prospective longitudinal 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; 2013 May; 41(5):556-62. PubMed ID: 23108803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of cesarean scar after single- and double-layer hysterotomy closure: a prospective cross-sectional study.
Tekiner NB; Çetin BA; Türkgeldi LS; Yılmaz G; Polat İ; Gedikbaşı A
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2018 May; 297(5):1137-1143. PubMed ID: 29397441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Assessing lateral uterine wall defects and residual myometrial thickness after cesarean section.
Al Naimi A; Mouzakiti N; Wolnicki B; Louwen F; Bahlmann F
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2021 Mar; 258():391-395. PubMed ID: 33540191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Prospective Evaluation of the Ultrasound Signs Proposed for the Description of Uterine Niche in Nonpregnant Women.
Feldman N; Maymon R; Jauniaux E; Manoach D; Mor M; Marczak E; Melcer Y
J Ultrasound Med; 2022 Apr; 41(4):917-923. PubMed ID: 34196967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Hysterotomy level at Cesarean section and occurrence of large scar defects: a randomized single-blind trial.
Vikhareva O; Rickle GS; Lavesson T; Nedopekina E; Brandell K; Salvesen KÅ
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Apr; 53(4):438-442. PubMed ID: 30484920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The association of endometrial closure during cesarean section to the risk of developing uterine scar defect: a randomized control trial.
Mohr-Sasson A; Castel E; Dadon T; Brandt A; Etinger R; Cohen A; Zajicek M; Haas J; Mashiach R
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2024 May; 309(5):2063-2070. PubMed ID: 38498161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
