Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38498161›Full record

Trial reportArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024

The association of endometrial closure during cesarean section to the risk of developing uterine scar defect: a randomized control trial.

Aya Mohr-Sasson, Elias Castel, Tal Dadon, Ariel Brandt, Roie Etinger, Adiel Cohen, Michal Zajicek, Jigal Haas, Roy Mashiach

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Placenta accreta spectrum.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025
    Review
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Aya Mohr-SassonDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center, 5265601, Tel-Hashomer, Israel. Mohraya@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9818-3041
Elias CastelDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center, 5265601, Tel-Hashomer, Israel.
Tal DadonDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center, 5265601, Tel-Hashomer, Israel.
Ariel BrandtDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center, 5265601, Tel-Hashomer, Israel.
Roie EtingerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center, 5265601, Tel-Hashomer, Israel.
Adiel CohenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center, 5265601, Tel-Hashomer, Israel.
Michal ZajicekDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center, 5265601, Tel-Hashomer, Israel.
Jigal HaasDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center, 5265601, Tel-Hashomer, Israel.
Roy MashiachDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center, 5265601, Tel-Hashomer, Israel.
Tel Aviv University · ILSheba Medical Center · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe surgical technique for uterine closure following cesarean section influences the healing of the cesarean scar; however, there is still no consensus on the optimal technique regarding the closure of the endometrium layer. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of closure versus non-closure of the endometrium during cesarean section on the risk to develop uterine scar defect and associated symptoms.

methodsA randomized prospective study was conducted of women undergoing first elective cesarean section at a single tertiary medical center. Exclusion criteria included previous uterine scar, preterm delivery and dysmorphic uterus. Women were randomized for endometrial layer closure versus non-closure. Six months following surgery, women were invited to the ambulatory gynecological clinic for follow-up visit. 2-D transvaginal ultrasound examination was performed to evaluate the cesarean scar characteristics. In addition, women were evaluated for symptoms that might be associated with uterine scar defect. Primary outcome was defined as the residual myometrial thickness (RMT) at the uterine cesarean scar. Data are presented as median and interquartile range.

results130 women were recruited to the study, of them follow-up was achieved in 113 (86.9%). 61 (54%) vs. 52 (46%) of the women were included in the endometrial closure vs. non-closure groups, respectively. Groups were comparable for patient's demographic, clinical characteristics and follow-up time for postoperative evaluation. Median RMT was 5.3 (3.0-7.7) vs. 4.6 (3.0-6.5) mm for the endometrial closure and non-closure groups, respectively (p = 0.38). Substantially low RMT (< 2.5 mm) was measured in four (6.6%) women in the endometrial closure group and three (5.8%) of the women in the non-closure group (p = 0.86). All other uterine scar sonographic measurements, as well as dysmenorrhea, pelvic pain and intermenstrual bleeding rates were comparable between the groups.

conclusionClosure versus non-closure of the endometrial layer during cesarean uterine incision repair has no significant difference in cesarean scar characteristics and symptom rates at 6 months follow-up.

Indexed as

Cesarean SectionCicatrixEndometriumFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPregnancyProspective StudiesUltrasonographyUterusCesarean scar defectDysmenorrheaEndometrial layerIntermenstrual bleedingResidual myometrial thickness

Identifiers

PMID38498161
OpenAlexW4392919996

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.