Every year 1.5 million cesarean section procedures are performed worldwide. As many women decide to get pregnant again, the population of pregnant women with a history of cesarean section is growing rapidly. For these women prediction of cesarean section scar performance is still a serious clinical problem. The purpose of the study was to assess whether the parameters of cesarean section scar in the nonpregnant uterus as determined using ultrasound can be used to predict uterine dehiscence in the next pregnancy. Starting in 2005, the study included 308 nonpregnant women with a history of low transverse cesarean section. The following ultrasonographic parameters of the cesarean section scar in the nonpregnant uterus were assessed: the residual myometrial thickness (RMT) and the width (W) and the depth (D) of the triangular hypoechoic scar niche. During 8 years of follow-up, 41 of these women were referred to our department for delivery. In all cases, a repeat cesarean section was performed and the lower uterine segment was assessed. Two independent statistical methods namely the logit model and Decision Tree analysis were used to determine the relation between the appearance of the cesarean section scar in the nonpregnat state and the performance of the scar in the next pregnancy. The logit model revealed that the D/RMT ratio showed significant correlation with cesarean section scar dehiscence (P-value of 0.007). Specifically, a D/RMT ratio value greater than 1.3035 indicated that the likelihood of dehiscence was greater than 50%. The Decision Tree analysis revealed that a diagnosis of dehiscence versus non-dehiscence could be based solely on one criterion, a D/RMT ratio of at least 0.785. The sensitivity of this method was 71%, and the specificity was 94%. Assessment of the cesarean section scar in the nonpregant uterus can be used to predict the occurrence of scar dehiscence in the next pregnancy.

Objectives To evaluate the differences in placental vascular indices and placental volume between normal and IUGR pregnancies. Methods A prospective study was conducted on a group of 100 normal and 20 IUGR pregnancies between 22 and 42 weeks of gestation. For the purpose of evaluation of placental volume and placental vascular indices, we applied 3D Power Doppler and VOCAL technique. Only patients with entirely visualized placenta were included in the study. Results A comparative analysis of vascularization index (VI), vascularization flow index (VFI), flow index (FI), and placental volume (PV) revealed statistically significant differences between normal and IUGR pregnancies. In normal pregnancies, the volume of the placenta was on average 92.42 cm³ larger than in pregnancies complicated by IUGR. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to evaluate the clinical usefulness of placental vascular indices and placental volume for discriminating IUGR and normal pregnancies. It was concluded that the VI, VFI, PV, FI parameters are the best discriminants, with the cut-off values of 5.30, 2.30, 199, and 36.0, respectively. Conclusions The quantitative assessment of placental vasculature and placental volume by means of 3D Power Doppler and VOCAL technique is an adjunctive modality for differentiation between normal and IUGR pregnancies. Our findings further suggest that the vascularization index (VI) and vascularization flow index (VFI) are the best parameters with the most favorable discriminating potential for proper identification of IUGR pregnancies.

The rising global incidence of cervical cancer is estimated to have affected more than 600,000 women, and nearly 350,000 women are predicted to have died from the disease in 2020 alone. Novel advances in cancer prevention, screening, diagnosis and treatment have all but reduced the burden of cervical cancer in developed nations. Unfortunately, cervical cancer is still the number one gynecological cancer globally. A limiting factor in managing cervical cancer globally is access to healthcare systems and trained medical personnel. Any methodology or procedure that may simplify or assist cervical cancer screening is desirable. Herein, we assess the use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted colposcopy in a tertiary hospital cervical diagnostic pathology unit. The study group consisted of 48 women (mean age 34) who were referred to the clinic for a routine colposcopy by their gynecologist. Cervical images were taken by an EVA-Visualcheck ^TM colposcope and run through an AI algorithm that gave real-time binary results of the cervical images as being either normal or abnormal. The primary endpoint of the study assessed the AI algorithm’s ability to correctly identify histopathology results of CIN2+ as being abnormal. A secondary endpoint was a comparison between the AI algorithm and the clinical assessment results. Overall, we saw lower sensitivity of AI (66.7%; 12/18) compared with the clinical assessment (100%; 18/18), and histopathology results as the gold standard. The positive predictive value (PPV) was comparable between AI (42.9%; 12/28) and the clinical assessment (41.8%; 18/43). The specificity, however, was higher in the AI algorithm (46.7%; 14/30) compared to the clinical assessment (16.7%; 5/30). Comparing the congruence between the AI algorithm and histopathology results showed agreement 54.2% of the time and disagreement 45.8% of the time. A trained colposcopist was in agreement 47.9% and disagreement 52.1% of the time. Assessing these results, there is currently no added benefit of using the AI algorithm as a tool of speeding up diagnosis. However, given the steady improvements in the AI field, we believe that AI-assisted colposcopy may be of use in the future.

Objectives: A growing number of studies suggest that the incomplete healing of the CS scar in the uterus increase the risk of uterine dehiscence or rupture during subsequent pregnancies. Thus, the factors that affect wound healing should be evaluated. We aimed to determine whether the morphology of the CS scar in non-pregnant women after one elective CS was affected by the site of the uterine incision, uterine flexion, maternal age, and fetal birth weight. Material and methods: 208 non-pregnant women were invited for participation in the study, but only 101 of them met inclusion criteria. Standardized scar parameters (residual myometrial thickness (RMT), depth (D) and width (W) of the hypoechoic niche) were measured using ultrasonography at least 6 weeks after the CS. Results: Scar defect was detected in 26 of 101 subjects. Women without scar defect had significantly higher RMT values (1.87 vs. 0.87), lower newborn birth weight (3127 g vs. 3295 g), and higher scar location above the internal cervical os (62% vs. 16%), than those with scar defect. Maternal age was significantly correlated with D value (R = 0.40). Uterine retroflexion was significantly correlated with a larger D value (R = 0.63) and a larger D/RMT ratio (R = 0.24). Conclusions: In low-risk women who have undergone one elective CS, several risk factors are associated with development of the scar defect, but only scar location can be modified during surgery. Future research is needed to determine whether a relatively higher incision location in the uterus can ensure optimal healing of the CS scar. Objectives: A growing number of studies suggest that the incomplete healing of the CS scar in the uterus increase the risk of uterine dehiscence or rupture during subsequent pregnancies. Thus, the factors that affect wound healing should be evaluated. We aimed to determine whether the morphology of the CS scar in non-pregnant women after one elective CS was affected by the site of the uterine incision, uterine flexion, maternal age, and fetal birth weight. Material and methods: 208 non-pregnant women were invited for participation in the study, but only 101 of them met inclusion criteria. Standardized scar parameters (residual myometrial thickness (RMT), depth (D) and width (W) of the hypoechoic niche) were measured using ultrasonography at least 6 weeks after the CS. Results: Scar defect was detected in 26 of 101 subjects. Women without scar defect had significantly higher RMT values (1.87 vs. 0.87), lower newborn birth weight (3127 g vs. 3295 g), and higher scar location above the internal cervical os (62% vs. 16%), than those with scar defect. Maternal age was significantly correlated with D value (R = 0.40). Uterine retroflexion was significantly correlated with a larger D value (R = 0.63) and a larger D/RMT ratio (R = 0.24). Conclusions: In low-risk women who have undergone one elective CS, several risk factors are associated with development of the scar defect, but only scar location can be modified during surgery. Future research is needed to determine whether a relatively higher incision location in the uterus can ensure optimal healing of the CS scar.