{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023346303501945526, 'fraction_numerical': 0.020752269779507133, 'mean_word_length': 4.718518518518518, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
OP12.08: Uterine scar evaluation during the postpartum: is there a place for a better technique for a Caesarean?

The study included cases with the first time cesarean; from 2008 to 2018 cesarean section cases that came for the 6 weeks postpartum visit were routinely checked by ultrasound . The operator evaluated two elements in a sagittal vue using the endovaginal approach: the thickness of the uterine scar ( figure) and the presence of a defect (niche) measuring it by surface in mm2 . The cases operated by a technique using a running suture for the full thickness uterine scar including the mucosa (group 1) were compared with cases operated by the same operator , with the same technique except that the suture was extramucosal full length ( group 2). Conclusion