{"paper_id":"ddcb570b-c110-4834-a045-38796e4b0115","body_text":"Abstract\nPurpose\nTo identify potential risk factors for bladder injury during cesarean section (CS).\nMethods\nWe conducted an observational case–control study from 2009 to 2024 at our Tertiary Care Hospital, matching each bladder injury case with four controls. Additionally, a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature was performed using MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Scopus, from inception to 2024; eligible studies were case–control studies assessing risk factors for bladder injury during CS. Random-effects regression with the restricted maximum likelihood method was employed for the meta-analysis.\nResults\nWe identified 23 cases of bladder injury out of 15,260 CSs at our hospital, resulting in a rate of 0.15%. Women with bladder injuries were significantly older (p = 0.022), with 47.8% having a history of previous CS, while no significant differences were observed between groups regarding prior abdominal surgery, endometriosis, or body mass index. The systematic review included four case–control studies, whose data were meta-analyzed with our patients, identifying several significant predictors: adhesions (OR 18.6, 95% CI 8.86–39.0), repeated CS (OR 3.25, 95% CI 2.02–5.23), emergent procedures (OR 3.15, 95% CI 1.71–5.80), failed vaginal birth after cesarean (OR 4.74, 95% CI 2.18–10.3), second stage of labor (OR 2.78, 95% CI 1.80–4.29), and macrosomia (OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.25–5.57).\nConclusions\nKey risk factors for cesarean bladder injury include prior CSs, adhesions, second stage of labor, macrosomia, failed VBAC, and emergent procedures. Identifying these risk factors is critical for preoperative assessment and counseling, allowing for better surgical planning and improved outcomes.\nSimilar content being viewed by others\nData availability\nData are available upon request.\nReferences\nDeLancey, J. Surgical Anatomy of the Female Pelvis; 2015.\nCordon BH, Fracchia JA, Armenakas NA (2014) Iatrogenic nonendoscopic bladder injuries over 24 Years: 127 cases at a single institution. Urology 84(1):222–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2014.03.028\nRajasekar D, Hall M (1997) Urinary tract injuries during obstetric intervention. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 104(6):731–734. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb11986.x\nKaskarelis D, Sakkas J, Aravantinos D, Michalas S, Zolotas J (1975) Urinary tract injuries in gynecological and obstetrical procedures. Int Surg 60(1):40–43\nPhipps MG, Watabe B, Clemons JL, Weitzen S, Myers DL (2005) Risk factors for bladder injury during cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 105(1):156–160. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000149150.93552.78\nRahman MS, Gasem T, Al Suleiman SA, Al Jama FE, Burshaid S, Rahman J (2009) Bladder injuries during cesarean section in a university hospital: a 25-year review. Arch Gynecol Obstet 279(3):349–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-008-0733-1\nTarney CM (2013) Bladder injury during cesarean delivery. Curr Womens Health Rev 9(2):70–76. https://doi.org/10.2174/157340480902140102151729\nJensen A-S, Rudnicki M (2023) Iatrogenic bladder and ureteral injuries following gynecological and obstetric surgery. Arch Gynecol Obstet 307(2):511–518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-022-06800-0\nDuong TH, Patterson TM (2014) Lower urinary tract injuries during hysterectomy in women with a history of two or more cesarean deliveries: a secondary analysis. Int Urogynecology J 25(8):1037–1040. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2324-3\nGungorduk K, Asicioglu O, Celikkol O, Sudolmus S, Ark C (2010) Iatrogenic bladder injuries during caesarean delivery: a case control study. J Obstet Gynaecol J Inst Obstet Gynaecol 30(7):667–670. https://doi.org/10.3109/01443615.2010.486086\nOliphant SS, Bochenska K, Tolge ME, Catov JM, Zyczynski HM (2014) Maternal lower urinary tract injury at the time of cesarean delivery. Int Urogynecology J 25(12):1709–1714. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2446-2\nFranchi M, Raffaelli R, Baggio S, Scollo M, Garzon S, Laganà AS, Casarin J, Zanconato G, Cromi A, Ghezzi F (2019) Unintentional transvesical caesarean section: incidence, risk factors, surgical technique and post-operative management. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 236:26–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.02.023\nChill HH, Karavani G, Reuveni-Salzman A, Lipschuetz M, Shimonovitz T, Cohen N, Shveiky D (2021) Urinary bladder injury during cesarean delivery: risk factors and the role of retrograde bladder filling. Int Urogynecology J 32(7):1801–1806. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-020-04630-9\nStark M (2021) An evidence-based cesarean section suggested for universal use. J Perinat Med 49(7):806–808. https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2021-0382\nMoher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) PRISMA Group. preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097\nStroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, Moher D, Becker BJ, Sipe TA, Thacker SB (2000) Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.283.15.2008\nStudy Quality Assessment Tools | NHLBI, NIH. https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessment-tools (accessed 2024–10–23).\nFreeman MF, Tukey JW (1950) Transformations related to the angular and the square root. Ann Math Stat 21(4):607–611. https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177729756\nBerman NG, Parker RA (2002) Meta-analysis: neither quick nor easy. BMC Med Res Methodol 2:10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-2-10\nAlcocer Urueta J, Bonilla Mares M, Gorbea Chávez V, Velázquez Valassi B (2009) Risk factors for bladder injuries during cesarean section. Actas Urol Esp 33(7):806–810. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0210-4806(09)74234-2\nIbrahim N, Spence AR, Czuzoj-Shulman N, Abenhaim HA (2023) Incidence and risk factors of bladder injury during cesarean delivery: a cohort study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 307(2):401–408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-022-06447-x\nMa G, Yang Y, Fu Q (2024) The incidence, indications, risk factors and pregnancy outcomes of peripartum hysterectomy at a tertiary hospital between 2013 and 2022. Arch Gynecol Obstet 310(1):145–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-023-07276-2\nSmid MC, Vladutiu CJ, Dotters-Katz SK, Boggess KA, Manuck TA, Stamilio DM (2017) Maternal obesity and major intraoperative complications during cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 216(6):614.e1-614.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.02.011\nSilver RM, Landon MB, Rouse DJ, Leveno KJ, Spong CY, Thom EA, Moawad AH, Caritis SN, Harper M, Wapner RJ, Sorokin Y, Miodovnik M, Carpenter M, Peaceman AM, O’Sullivan MJ, Sibai B, Langer O, Thorp JM, Ramin SM, Mercer BM (2006) National institute of child health and human development maternal-fetal medicine units network maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000219750.79480.84\nCahill AG, Stout MJ, Stamilio DM, Odibo AO, Peipert JF, Macones GA (2008) Risk factors for bladder injury in patients with a prior hysterotomy. Obstet Gynecol 112(1):116–120. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e31817946f4\nAlexander JM, Leveno KJ, Rouse DJ, Landon MB, Gilbert S, Spong CY, Varner MW, Moawad AH, Caritis SN, Harper M, Wapner RJ, Sorokin Y, Miodovnik M, O’Sullivan MJ, Sibai BM, Langer O, Gabbe SG (2007) National institute of child health and human development (NICHD) maternal-fetal medicine units network (MFMU) comparison of maternal and infant outcomes from primary cesarean delivery during the second compared with first stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000257121.56126.fe\nFunding\nThe authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.\nAuthor information\nAuthors and Affiliations\nContributions\nMV and LL screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, extracted data, performed the case–control study on our population, and prepared the first draft of the case–control results. SD and LP reviewed all titles and abstracts, screened full texts, scanned reference lists of included studies, extracted data from all studies, assessed study quality, performed the meta-analysis, and prepared the first draft of the manuscript. JL performed the statistical analysis of our case–control study and the meta-analysis, interpreted the results, and reviewed the drafts. EC conceived the study, provided methodological and content expertise, resolved conflicts, reviewed all drafts, and prepared the final manuscript. All authors reviewed the final version prior to submission.\nCorresponding author\nEthics declarations\nConflict of interest\nThe authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.\nEthical approval\nEthics approval was not required. The name of the ethics committee is “Comitato Etico Area Vasta Emilia Centro – AVEC, Policlinico Sant’Orsola”.\nAdditional information\nPublisher's Note\nSpringer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.\nSupplementary Information\nBelow is the link to the electronic supplementary material.\nRights and permissions\nSpringer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.\nAbout this article\nCite this article\nDoroldi, S., Piemonti, L., Valeriani, M. et al. Risk factors for bladder injuries during cesarean sections: insights from a 15 year experience at a tertiary care center and a systematic review with meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 310, 2829–2838 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-024-07826-2\nReceived:\nAccepted:\nPublished:\nVersion of record:\nIssue date:\nDOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-024-07826-2","source_license":"public-domain-us","license_restricted":false}