Re-laparotomy after cesarean section

European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology

Volumn 134, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 184-187

  Lurie, Samuel ^a,b   Sadan, Oscar ^a,b   Golan, Abraham ^a,b  

^a WOLFSON MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

^b TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

Cesarean section; Re laparotomy; Surgery complications

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL ABSCESS; ADULT; ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DIAPHRAGM EVENTRATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; HYSTERECTOMY; LAPAROTOMY; MATERNAL MORTALITY; POSTOPERATIVE HEMORRHAGE; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REOPERATION;

EID: 34548860656     PISSN: 03012115     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2006.10.017     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Lurie S. The changing motives of cesarean section: from the ancient world to the twenty-first century. Arch Gynecol Obstet 271 (2005) 281-285
2. Lurie S., and Glezerman M. The history of cesarean technique. Am J Obstet Gynecol 189 (2003) 1803-1806
3. Zelop C., and Heffner L.J. The downside of cesarean delivery: short- and long-term complications. Clin Obstet Gynecol 47 (2004) 386-393
4. Mayer H.G., and Lirmberger M. Early abdominal second interventions following gynecologic surgery. Zentralbl Gynakol 97 (1975) 692-695
5. Seffah J.D. Re-laparotomy after cesarean. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 88 (2005) 253-257
6. Sarsam S.E., Elliott J.P., and Lam G.K. Management of wound complications from cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol Surv 60 (2005) 462-473
7. Chukudebelu W.O., and Okafor E.I. Burst abdomen following cesarean section. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 15 (1978) 532-534
8. Hendrix S.L., Schimp V., Martin J., Singh A., Kruger M., and McNeeley S.G. The legendary superior strength of the Pfannenstiel incision: a myth?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 182 (2000) 1446-1451
9. Lurie S., Feinstein M., and Mamet Y. Assessment of a newer technique for cesarean section. Arch Gynecol Obstet 266 (2002) 195-197
10. Berghella V., Baxter J.K., and Chauhan S.P. Evidence-based surgery for cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 193 (2005) 1607-1617
11. Howes E.L., Sooy J.W., and Harvey S.C. The healing of wounds as determined by their tensile strength. JAMA 92 (1929) 42
12. Franz M.G., Smith P.D., Wachtel T.L., et al. Fascial incisions heal faster than skin: a new model of abdominal wall repair. Surgery 129 (2001) 203-208
13. Rock J.A., and Johns III H.W. Te Linde's operative gynecology. 9th ed. (2003), Lippincot-Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia pp. 240-1
14. Cengiz Y., Mansson P., and Israelsson L.A. Conventional running suture and continuous double loop closure: an experimental study of wound strength. Eur J Surg 166 (2000) 647-649
15. Ceydeli A., Rucinski J., and Wise L. Finding the best abdominal closure: an evidence-based review of the literature. Curr Surg 62 (2005) 220-225
16. Jenkins T.P.N. The burst abdominal wound: a mechanical approach. Br J Surg 63 (1976) 873-876
17. Lurie S., and Mamet Y. Should loose fascial suture be removed on 1st postoperative week in patients with superficial wound dehiscence and intact fascia after cesarean section by Pfannenstiel incision. J Obstet Gynecol 25 (2005) 355-356