Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32967222›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

The Health Impact of Surgical Techniques and Assistive Methods Used in Cesarean Deliveries: A Systemic Review.

Li-Hsuan Wang, Kok-Min Seow, Li-Ru Chen, Kuo-Hu Chen

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 87% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Li-Hsuan WangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Taipei Tzu-Chi Hospital, The Buddhist Tzu-Chi Medical Foundation, Taipei 231, Taiwan.
Kok-Min SeowDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shin Kong Wu Ho-Su Memorial Hospital, Taipei 111, Taiwan.
Li-Ru ChenDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Mackay Memorial Hospital, Taipei 10449, Taiwan.
Kuo-Hu ChenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Taipei Tzu-Chi Hospital, The Buddhist Tzu-Chi Medical Foundation, Taipei 231, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-4758-0351
National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University · TWTaipei Tzu Chi Hospital · TWTzu Chi University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cesarean delivery is one of the most frequently performed surgeries in women throughout the world. However, the most optimal technique to minimize maternal and fetal morbidities is still being debated due to various clinical situations and surgeons' preferences. The contentious topics are the use of vacuum devices other than traditional fundal pressure to assist in the delivery of the fetal head and the techniques of uterine repair used during cesarean deliveries. There are two well-described techniques for suturing the uterus: The uterus can be repaired either temporarily exteriorized (out of abdominal cavity) or in situ (within the peritoneal cavity). Numerous studies have attempted to compare these two techniques in different aspects, including operative time, blood loss, and maternal and fetal outcomes. This review provides an overview of the assistive method of vacuum devices compared with fundal pressure, and the two surgical techniques for uterine repair following cesarean delivery. This descriptive literature review was performed to address important issues for clinical practitioners. It aims to compare the advantages and disadvantages of the assistive methods and surgical techniques used in cesarean deliveries. All of the articles were retrieved from the databases Medline and PubMed using the search terms cesarean delivery, vacuum, and exteriorization. The searching results revealed that after exclusion, there were 9 and 13 eligible articles for vacuum assisted cesarean delivery and uterine exteriorization, respectively. Although several studies have concluded vacuum assistance for fetal extraction as a simple, effective, and beneficial method during fetal head delivery during cesarean delivery, further research is still required to clarify the safety of vacuum assistance. In general, compared to the use of in situ uterine repairs during cesarean delivery, uterine exteriorization for repairs may have benefits of less blood loss and shorter operative time. However, it may also carry a higher risk of intraoperative complications such as nausea and vomiting, uterine atony, and a longer time to the return of bowel function. Clinicians should consider these factors during shared decision-making with their pregnant patients to determine the most suitable techniques for cesarean deliveries.

Indexed as

Cesarean SectionIntraoperative ComplicationsPostoperative ComplicationsSuture TechniquesFemaleHumansNauseaPregnancyUterusVomitingcesarean deliveryfundal pressurein situ repairuterine exteriorizationvacuum

Identifiers

PMID32967222
PMCPMC7558715
OpenAlexW3087602134

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.