Surgical staples compared with subcuticular suture for skin closure after cesarean delivery: A randomized controlled trial

Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 121, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 33-38

  Figueroa, Dana ^a   Jauk, Victoria Chapman ^a   Szychowski, Jeff M ^a   Garner, Rachel ^a   Biggio, Joseph R ^a   Andrews, William W ^a   Hauth, John ^a   Tita, Alan T N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTRACUTANEOUS SUTURE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OPERATION DURATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SKIN INCISION; STAPLER; SUTURE; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; WOUND CLOSURE; WOUND COMPLICATION; WOUND INFECTION;

ADULT; CESAREAN SECTION; DERMATOLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; FEMALE; HUMANS; OPERATIVE TIME; PAIN; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PREGNANCY; RISK; SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION; SUTURE TECHNIQUES; SUTURES; TREATMENT OUTCOME; WOUND HEALING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84872113255     PISSN: 00297844     EISSN: 1873233X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31827a072c     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, Osterman MJK, Kirmeyer S, Matthews TJ, et al. Births: final data for 2009. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2011;60:1-70.
2. Owen J, Andrews WW. Wound complications after cesarean sections. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1994;37:842-55.
3. Smyth ET, Emmerson AM. Surgical site infection surveillance. J Hosp Infect 2000;45:173-84.
4. Reilly J, Twaddle S, McIntosh J, Kean L. An economic analysis of surgical wound infection. J Hosp Infect 2001;49:245-9.
5. Ramsey PS, White AM, Guinn DA, Lu GC, Ramin SM, Davies JK, et al. Subcutaneous tissue reapproximation, alone or in combination with drain, in obese women undergoing cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2005;105:967-73.
6. Alderdice F, McKenna D, Dornan J. Techniques and materials for skin closure in caesarean section. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2003, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD003577. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003577.
7. Tuuli MG, Rampersad RM, Carbone JF, Stamilio D, Macones GA, Odibo AO. Staples compared with subcuticular suture for skin closure after cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2011;117:682-90.
8. Frishman GN, Schwartz T, Hogan JW. Closure of Pfannenstiel skin incisions. J Reprod Med 1997;42:627-30.
9. Rousseau JA, Girard K, Turcot-Lemay L, Thomas N. A randomized study comparing skin closure in cesarean sections: staples vs subcuticular sutures. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009; 200:265.e1-4.
10. Basha SL, Rochon ML, Quiñones JN, Coassolo KM, Rust OA, Smulian JC. Randomized controlled trial of wound complication rates of subcuticular suture vs staples for skin closure at cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203:285.e1-8.
11. Singer AJ, Arora B, Dagum A, Valentine S, Hollander JE. Development and validation of a novel scar and evaluation scale. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007;120:1892-7.
12. Clay FS, Walsh CA, Walsh SR. Staples vs subcuticular sutures for skin closure at cesarean delivery: a metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011;204:378-83.