SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2014
Surgical techniques for uterine incision and uterine closure at the time of caesarean section.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Impact of Double-layer Versus Single-layer Uterine Closure Suture in Cesarean Section on the Development of Postoperative Uterine Scar Deficiency: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Single Versus Double-layer Closure of The Cesarean Scar In Niche Development: A Randomized Clinical Trial
High Segmental Hysterotomy vs. Low Segmental Hysterotomy: Association With the Incidence of Uterine Wall Defects After Cesarean Section
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced recovery after elective caesarean: a rapid review of clinical protocols, and an umbrella review of systematic reviews.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2017Pooled it
- Antibiotic prophylaxis versus no prophylaxis for preventing infection after cesarean section.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Trial
- Caesarean section surgical techniques: 3 year follow-up of the CORONIS fractional, factorial, unmasked, randomised controlled trial.Lancet (London, England) · 2016Trial
- Acute and chronic complications of cesarean delivery: An update for the general radiologist.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
- Objective assessment of cesarean section suturing techniques using a uterine simulator.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Evidence-based surgical procedures to optimize caesarean outcomes: an overview of systematic reviews.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Review
- Horizontal mattress uterine closure compared to single layered lock suture in cesarean section - A retrospective cohort study.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2023Article
- Outcomes of Laparoscopic Cesarean Scar Defect Repair: Retrospective and Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Letter on Genovese et al.'s "Impact of Hysterotomy Closure Technique on Subsequent Cesarean Scar Defects Formation: A Systematic Review".Gynecologic and obstetric investigation · 2023Article
- Viability of ex-vivo myography as a diagnostic tool for rectus abdominis muscle electrical activity collected at Cesarean section within a diamater cohort study.Biomedical engineering online · 2022Article
- Sharp expansion of the cesarean delivery uterine incision in women with previous cesarean section scars.Clinical case reports · 2022Article
- Incidence and risk factors for surgical wound complications in women with body mass index >30 kg/mAJOG global reports · 2022Article
- Surgical benefits of bidirectional knotless barbed sutures over conventional sutures for uterine repair during cesarean section-A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2022Article
- Fantastic niches and where to find them: the current diagnosis and management of uterine niche.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2022Article
- Effect of Closure of Anterior Abdominal Wall Layers on Early Postoperative Findings at Cesarean Section: A Prospective Cross-sectional Study.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2021Article
- Fetal Surgery in the Primate 4.0: A New Technique 30 Years Later.Fetal diagnosis and therapy · 2021Article
- The Case for Standardizing Cesarean Delivery Technique: Seeing the Forest for the Trees.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2020Article
- Lower-Segment Transverse Cesarean Section.Surgery journal (New York, N.Y.) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCaesarean section is a common operation. Techniques vary depending on both the clinical situation and the preferences of the operator.
objectivesTo compare the effects of 1) different types of uterine incision, 2) methods of performing the uterine incision, 3) suture materials and technique of uterine closure (including single versus double layer closure of the uterine incision) on maternal health, infant health, and healthcare resource use. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (1 September 2013) and reference lists of all identified papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: All published, unpublished, and ongoing randomised controlled trials comparing various types and closure of uterine incision during caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors evaluated trials for inclusion and methodological quality without consideration of their results according to the stated eligibility criteria and extracted data independently. MAIN
resultsOur search strategy identified 60 studies for consideration, of which 27 randomised trials involving 17,808 women undergoing caesarean section were included in the review. Overall, the methodological quality of the trials was variable, with 12 of the 27 included trials adequately describing the randomisation sequence, with less than half describing adequately methods of allocation concealment, and only six trials indicating blinding of outcome assessors.Two trials compared auto-suture devices with traditional hysterotomy involving 300 women. No statistically significant difference in febrile morbidity between the stapler and conventional incision groups was apparent (risk ratio (RR) 0.92; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 2.20).Five studies were included in the review that compared blunt versus sharp dissection when performing the uterine incision involving 2141 women. There were no statistically significant differences identified for the primary outcome febrile morbidity following blunt or sharp extension of the uterine incision (four studies; 1941 women; RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.70 to 1.05). Mean blood loss (two studies; 1145 women; average mean difference (MD) -55.00 mL; 95% CI -79.48 to -30.52), and the need for blood transfusion (two studies; 1345 women; RR 0.24; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.62) were significantly lower following blunt extension.A single trial compared transverse with cephalad-caudad blunt extension of the uterine incision, involving 811 women, and while mean blood loss was reported to be lower following transverse extension (one study; 811 women; MD 42.00 mL; 95% CI 1.31 to 82.69), the clinical significance of such a small volume difference is of uncertain clinical relevance. There were no other statistically significant differences identified for the limited outcomes reported.A single trial comparing chromic catgut with polygactin-910, involving 9544 women reported that catgut closure versus closure with polygactin was associated with a significant reduction in the need for blood transfusion (one study, 9544 women, RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.76) and a significant reduction in complications requiring re-laparotomy (one study, 9544 women, RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.89).Nineteen studies were identified comparing single layer with double layer closure of the uterus, with data contributed to the meta-analyses from 14 studies. There were no statistically significant differences identified for the primary outcome, febrile morbidity (nine studies; 13,890 women; RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.12). Although the meta-analysis suggested single layer closure was associated with a reduction in mean blood loss, heterogeneity is high and this limits the clinical applicability of the result. There were no differences identified in risk of blood transfusion (four studies; 13,571 women; average RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.17; Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.15; I² = 49%), or other reported clinical outcomes. AUTHORS'
conclusionsCaesarean section is a common procedure performed on women worldwide. There is increasing evidence that for many techniques, short-term maternal outcomes are equivalent. Until long-term health effects are known, surgeons should continue to use the techniques they prefer and currently use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.