Atypical uterine rupture: case report and literature review

Authors

  • Matteo Terrinoni Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "Alto Tevere" Hospital of Città di Castello, USL Umbria 1, Perugia, Italy https://orcid.org/0009-0009-5087-0374
  • Federica Adinolfi Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
  • Michele Palisciano Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "Branca" Hospital of Gubbio- Gualdo Tadino, USL Umbria 1, Perugia, Italy
  • Dario Rossetti Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "Alto Tevere" Hospital of Città di Castello, USL Umbria 1, Perugia, Italy
  • Gian Carlo Di Renzo PREIS School, International and European School of Perinatal, Neonatal and Reproductive Medicine, Florence, Italy; Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, I.M. Sechenov First State University of Moscow, Moscow, Russia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20251253

Keywords:

Embryo transfer, Fetal presentation, Labor, Laparoscopic myomectomy, Uterine rupture

Abstract

Uterine rupture, defined as a partial or complete disruption of the uterine wall, can occur spontaneously during pregnancy or labor-even without classic symptoms. This report presents an atypical case involving a 34-year-old woman with a history of laparoscopic myomectomy and large loop excision of the transformation zone, who conceived via in vitro fertilization. At 35 weeks, during an elective cesarean section for complications including intrauterine growth restriction and oligohydramnios, dehiscence of a previous uterine scar was incidentally discovered, with the fetal limb partially entrapped. Remarkably, the patient exhibited minimal pain and haemorrhagic signs, deviating from the typical presentation. This case highlights the complex interplay between surgical history, assisted reproductive techniques, and mechanical factors in predisposing patients to uterine rupture. It emphasizes the need for careful monitoring and individualized management strategies for high-risk pregnancies, and calls for further research to refine clinical guidelines.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Manoharan M, Wuntakal R, Erskine K. Uterine rupture: a revisit. Obstetrician Gynaecol. 2010;12:223–30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1576/toag.12.4.223.27613

Ofir K, Sheiner E, Levy A, Katz M, Mazor M. Uterine rupture: differences between a scarred and an unscarred uterus. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191(2):425-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2004.01.026

Guiliano M, Closset E, Therby D, LeGoueff F, Deruelle P, Subtil D. Signs, symptoms and complications of complete and partial uterine ruptures during pregnancy and delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;179:130-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.05.004

ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 205: Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133(2):110-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003078

Stock SJ, Thomson AJ, Papworth S. Antenatal corticosteroids to reduce neonatal morbidity and mortality: Green‐top Guideline No. 74. BJOG: An International J Obst & Gynaecol. 2022 Jul 1;129(8):44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.17027

Martel MJ, MacKinnon CJ. Retired: No. 155-Guidelines for vaginal birth after previous caesarean birth. J Obst and Gynaecol Canada. 2018;40(3):195-207. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2018.01.014

Cron HT, Simm P, Said JM, Cheong JL, Cranswick N, Hu YJ. Variation in clinical practice guideline recommendations for medication use in pregnancy in Australia: A systematic review. Australian and New Zealand J of Obst and Gynaecol. 2024;64(3):193-203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13784

Nie Q, Luo S, Chen B, Wang L, He F. Risk factors and outcomes of uterine rupture before onset of labor vs. during labor: a multicenter study. J Perinat Med. 2024;2:309-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2024-0309

Guise JM, McDonagh MS, Osterweil P, Nygren P, Chan BK, Helfand M. Systematic review of the incidence and consequences of uterine rupture in women with previous caesarean section. BMJ. 2004;329(7456):19-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.329.7456.19

Essebbagh Y, Errmili K, Iddouba S, Elharmouchi O, Zeraidi N, Baidada A. Neglected uterine ruptur myth or reality? - A case report. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2025;127:110830. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijscr.2025.110830

Wen SW, Rusen ID, Walker M, Liston R, Kramer MS, Baskett T, et al. Maternal health study group, Canadian perinatal surveillance system. Comparison of maternal mortality and morbidity between trial of labor and elective cesarean section among women with previous cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191(4):1263-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2004.03.022

Grgić G, Cerovac A, Hadžimehmedović A, Habek D. Vaginal versus caesarean delivery in fetal macrosomia a retrospective cohort study. Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift. 2025;8:11-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10354-024-01068-2

Downloads

Published

2025-04-28

How to Cite

Terrinoni, M., Adinolfi, F., Palisciano, M., Rossetti, D., & Di Renzo, G. C. (2025). Atypical uterine rupture: case report and literature review. International Journal of Reproduction, Contraception, Obstetrics and Gynecology, 14(5), 1627–1630. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20251253

Issue

Section

Case Reports