Stark's caesarian section. Advantages compared to traditional caesarian section;Taglio cesareo secondo Stark

Minerva Ginecologica

Volumn 51, Issue 5, 1999, Pages 203-206

  Corosu, R ^a   Roma, B ^a   Vizzaccaro, F ^a   Franchi, M ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Caesarian section methods; Postoperative complications; Pregnancy; Retrospective studies

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PREGNANCY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SURGICAL INFECTION; TIME; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

CESAREAN SECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PREGNANCY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0033128837     PISSN: 00264784     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (7)

1. Campanelli M, Ferrati A, La versione del cesareo secondo Michael Stark. Doctor 1998;7:37
2. Stark M, Finkel AR. Comparison between the Joel-Cohen and Pfannenstiel incisions in cesarean section. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1994;53:121-2.
3. Stark M, Chuvkin Y, Kupfersztain C, Guedj P. Finkel AR. Evaluation of combinations of procedures in cesarean section. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1995;48:273-6.
4. Jakobi P, Weissman A, Zimmer EZ, Paldi E. Single dose cefazolin prophylaxis for caesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynccol 1988;158(5):1049-52.
5. Litta P, Vita P, Konishi De Toffoli J, Onnis GL. Risk factors for complicating infections after cesarean section. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 1995;1:71-5.
6. Beattie PG, Rings TR, Hunter MF, Lake Y. Risks factors for wound infection following caesarean section. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 1994;34(4):398.
7. Ferrari AG, Frigerio L, Candotti G, Origoni M, Mariani A, Petrone M. Modified Stark procedure for caesarean section. First Italian experience. It J Gynaecol Obstet 1997;3:95-102.