SynthesisBMC surgery2025
Ultrasound outcomes and surgical parameters of the double-layer purse-string uterine closure technique in cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.
Synthesis in BMC surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A prospective comparative study of single-layer versus double-layer uterine closure techniques on cesarean scar formation.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Trial
- Uterine closure after cesarean delivery: surgical technique, biological rationale, and clinical implications.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA cesarean scar defect is a structural abnormality in the myometrium at the site of a prior cesarean incision, primarily influenced by the closure technique. Purse-string uterine suturing (PSUS) may reduce the incidence of cesarean scar defects and improve uterine integrity. However, the literature presents inconsistent findings, necessitating a systematic evaluation. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aims to assess the impact of PSUS on ultrasound outcomes and surgical parameters related to cesarean scars.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis involved a search for relevant publications in English and Persian across multiple databases, including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, and SID. The search was unrestricted by date and included all available publications up to August 8, 2024. The risk of bias in the included studies was evaluated using the Risk of Bias 2 (ROB2) tool, while the certainty of the evidence was assessed through the GRADE approach. Meta-regression was employed to investigate potential risk factors for cesarean scar defects, and trial sequential analysis was conducted to mitigate Type I and Type II errors.
resultsA total of 353 studies were identified through the search strategy, with 8 studies included in the analysis. The meta-analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in the rate of cesarean scar defects in the PSUS group compared to the control group (risk ratio [RR] 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36 to 0.58; 8 trials, 751 participants, I² = 0%, indicating no heterogeneity). Additionally, a shorter uterine incision length was observed in the PSUS group compared to the control group (MD -3.84, 95% CI -4.97 to -2.71; 4 trials, 438 participants, I² = 80%, suggesting substantial heterogeneity). The PSUS group also exhibited greater residual myometrium thickness (RMT) than the control group (MD 1.33, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.94; 5 trials, 417 participants, I² = 92%, indicating considerable heterogeneity). However, no statistically significant differences were found between the PSUS and control groups regarding operation time (p = 0.10, I² = 67%, suggesting moderate heterogeneity), length (p = 0.14, I² = 98%, indicating considerable heterogeneity), height (p = 0.10, I² = 76%, suggesting substantial heterogeneity) of incision defects, or blood loss during the procedure (p = 0.94, I² = 0%, indicating no heterogeneity).
conclusionsThe use of PSUS during cesarean sections significantly reduces the occurrence of cesarean scar defects, indicating a clear clinical benefit with moderate certainty. However, the evidence for other ultrasound evaluation outcomes and surgical parameters remains of low to very low certainty. Therefore, further research is essential to validate these findings and assess the long-term clinical implications of integrating PSUS into cesarean procedures.
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.