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

Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 122, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 878-884

  Aabakke, Anna J M ^a,b   Krebs, Lone ^a,b   Pipper, Christian B ^a,b   Secher, Niels J ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b AARHUS UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFECTION RATE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCAR; SCORING SYSTEM; SINGLE BLIND PROCEDURE; SKIN INJURY; STAPLER; SURGICAL STAPLING; SUTURE; SUTURING METHOD; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; WOUND CLOSURE;

ADULT; CESAREAN SECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PREGNANCY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SUTURE TECHNIQUES; SUTURES;

EID: 84889829238     PISSN: 00297844     EISSN: 1873233X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182a5f0c3     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Berghella V, Baxter JK, Chauhan SP. Evidence-based surgery for cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;193:1607-17.
2. National Institutes of Health state-of-the-science conference statement: cesarean delivery on maternal request March 27-29, 2006. Obstet Gynecol 2006;107:1386-97.
3. Villar J, Valladares E, Wojdyla D, Zavaleta N, Carroli G, Velazco A, et al. Caesarean delivery rates and pregnancy outcomes: The 2005 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Latin America. Lancet 2006;367:1819-29.
4. Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Gulmezoglu AM, Souza JP, Taneepanichskul S, Ruyan P, et al. Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia: The WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health 2007-08. Lancet 2010;375:490-9.
5. Fødselsregisteret, Sundhedsstyrelsen. Available at: http://www.sstdk/Indberetning%20og%20statistik/Sundhedsdata/Foedsler- fertilitetsbehandling-og-abortaspx. Retrieved October 26, 2010.
6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Vital Statistics Report. Births: preliminary data for 2009. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr59/nvsr59-03.pdf Retrieved June 22, 2011.
7. Jenkins TR. It's time to challenge surgical dogma with evidence- based data. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;189:423-7.
8. Tully L, Gates S, Brocklehurst P, McKenzie-McHarg K, Ayers S. Surgical techniques used during caesarean section operations: results of a national survey of practice in the UK. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2002;102:120-6.
9. Altman AD, Allen VM, McNeil SA, Dempster J. Pfannenstiel incision closure: A review of current skin closure techniques. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2009;31:514-20.
10. Basha SL, Rochon ML, Quinones 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;203:285-8.
11. Cromi A, Ghezzi F, Gottardi A, Cherubino M, Uccella S, Valdatta L. Cosmetic outcomes of various skin closure methods following cesarean delivery: A randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203:36-8.
12. Frishman GN, Schwartz T, Hogan JW. Closure of Pfannenstiel skin incisions-staples vs. subcuticular suture. J Reprod Med 1997;42:627-30.
13. Gaertner I, Burkhardt T, Beinder E. Scar appearance of different skin and subcutaneous tissue closure techniques in caesarean section: A randomized study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2008;138:29-33.
14. Johnson A, Young D, Reilly J. Caesarean section surgical site infection surveillance. J Hosp Infect 2006;64:30-5.
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. 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.
18. Alderdice F, McKenna D, Dornan J. Techniques and materials for skin closure in caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;2:CD003577.
19. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gotzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, et al. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010;340:c869.
20. Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Ravaud P. Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2008;148:295-309.
21. Hjermstad MJ, Fayers PM, Haugen DF, Caraceni A, Hanks GW, Loge JH, et al. Studies comparing numerical rating scales, verbal rating scales, and visual analogue scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: A systematic literature review. J Pain Symptom Manage 2011;41:1073-93.
22. Singer AJ, Arora B, Dagum A, Valentine S, Hollander JE. Development and validation of a novel scar evaluation scale. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007;120:1892-7.
23. Duncan JA, Bond JS, Mason T, Ludlow A, Cridland P, O'Kane S, et al. Visual analogue scale scoring and ranking: A suitable and sensitive method for assessing scar quality? Plast Reconstr Surg 2006;118:909-18.
24. Quinn JV, Drzewiecki AE, Stiell IG, Elmslie TJ. Appearance scales to measure cosmetic outcomes of healed lacerations. Am J Emerg Med 1995;13:229-31.
25. Ethicon. Ethicon Product Catalogue. Available at: http://www. ecatalogethiconcom/sutures-absorbable. Retrieved June 1, 2012.
26. Nuthalapaty FS, Kuper SG, Higdon HL 3rd. Staples compared with subcuticular suture for skin closure after cesarean delivery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 118:166-7.
27. Rocha AJ, Rodrigues T, Neves JP. Implications of early staples removal at cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011;205: e12-3.
28. Mackeen AD, Berghella V, Larsen ML. Techniques and materials for skin closure in caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;9:CD003577.
29. Nuthalapaty FS. A randomized controlled trial of early versus Delayed skin staple removal following cesarean delivery in the obese patient. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01114451. Retrieved May 30, 2012.
30. Figueroa D, Jauk VC, Szychowski JM, Garner R, Biggio JR, Andrews WW, et al. Surgical staples compared with subcuticular suture for skin closure after cesarean delivery: A randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2013;121:33-8.
31. Hollinsky C, Sandberg S. Measurement of the tensile strength of the ventral abdominal wall in comparison with scar tissue. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2007;22:88-92.
32. Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Ogden CL, Curtin LR. Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999-2008. JAMA 2010; 303:235-41.