Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37667481›Full record

ArticleTurkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology2023

Comparison of classic single-layer uterin suture and double-layer purse-string suture techniques for uterus closure in terms of postoperative short-term uterine isthmocele: A prospective randomized controlled trial.

Elif Yıldız, Burcu Timur

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elif YıldızUniversity of Health Sciences Turkey, Gaziosmanpaşa Training and Research Hospital, Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, İstanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0001-8396-5542
Burcu TimurOrdu University Training and Research Hospital, Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ordu, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0001-8769-5949
Ordu University · TRSağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To compare the short-term results of classic single-layer uterine closure and double-layer purse-string uterine closure (Turan technique) techniques in cesarean section in terms of the incidence of ischiocele formation. Materials and Methods: This was a prospective randomized controlled trial study. Participants undergoing first-time cesarean delivery were randomized into two groups. Fifty-eight participants were included in the double-layered uterine closure group (study group), while 53 participants were randomized into the classical single-layered uterine closure group (control group). For comparison of isthmocele formation, transvaginal ultrasound examination was planned in all patients 6 weeks after surgery. The operation data,the formation of isthmocele, its dimensions and volume were recorded. Results: A total of 111 women were included in the study. The incidence of ischiocele at 6 weeks after birth was not significantly different between the groups (p=0.128). Isthmosel was detected in 20.8% of single-layer closures, and this rate was determined as 10.3% in the purse technique. In the Kerr incision made during surgery, the uterine incision size did not differ in either group, but the uterine incision length after suturing was significantly smaller in the purse technique compared with the other group (p<0.001). Conclusion: The incidence of ischiocele formation after cesarean section and the depth of the ischiocele was independent of the uterotomy closure technique.

Indexed as

Cesarean sectionisthmoceleresidual myometriumsuture technicsuterine scar

Identifiers

PMID37667481
PMCPMC10478730
OpenAlexW4386417113

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.