The impact of caesarean scar niche on fertility - a systematic review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The trend of increasing caesarean section (CS) rates brings up questions related to subfertility. Research regarding the influence of CS on assisted reproduction techniques (ART) is conflicting. A potential mechanism behind CS-induced subfertility is intra uterine fluid resulting from a caesarean scar defect or niche. The vaginal microbiome has been repeatedly connected to negative ART outcomes, but it is unknown if the microbiome is changed in relation to a niche. This systematic review describes literature investigating the effect of a niche on live birth rates after assisted reproduction. Furthermore, studies investigating a difference in microbial composition in subfertile persons with a niche compared to no niche are evaluated. Pubmed, Embase and Web of Science were searched on March 2023 for comparative studies on both study questions. Inclusion criteria were i.e., English language, human-only studies, availability of the full article and presence of comparative pregnancy data on a niche. The quality of the included studies and their risk of bias were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for cohort studies. The results were graphically displayed in a forest plot. Six retrospective cohort studies could be included on fertility outcomes, with a total of 1083 persons with a niche and 3987 without a niche. The overall direction of effect shows a negative impact of a niche on the live birth rate (pooled aOR 0.58, 95% CI 0.48-0.69) with low-grade evidence. Three studies comparing the microbiome between persons with and without a CS could be identified. There is low-grade evidence to conclude that the presence of a niche reduces live birth rates when compared to persons without a niche. The theory that a caesarean has a negative impact on pregnancy outcomes because of dysbiosis promoted by the niche is interesting, but there is no sufficient literature about this. The increasing number of caesarean deliveries has raised concerns about how it might affect a woman’s ability to get pregnant afterwards. Some studies suggest that having a caesarean section (CS) could make it harder to conceive, particularly through in vitro fertilisation (IVF). The reason could be the scar or niche from a previous caesarean. This niche can cause fluid inside the uterus. We also know that the mix of bacteria in the vagina, called the vaginal microbiome, can affect a woman’s chances of getting pregnant, especially with treatments like IVF. But we are not sure if having a caesarean affects the vaginal microbiome. To understand this better, van den Tweel’s team looked at studies on whether having a niche from a caesarean affects a woman’s chance of having a baby through IVF. They also looked at studies comparing the bacteria in the vagina of women who have had a caesarean with those who have not. They found that having a caesarean niche makes it harder for a woman to have a baby through IVF. However, the evidence from these studies is not very strong. We still do not know enough about whether having a caesarean niche affects the bacteria in the vagina.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,028 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,007 | 0,008 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,008 | 0,010 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».