Abdominal surgical incisions for caesarean section

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Volumn 2013, Issue 5, 2013, Pages

  Mathai, Matthews ^a   Hofmeyr, G Justus ^b,d   Mathai, Namratha E ^c  

^a WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF THE WITWATERSRAND   (South Africa)

^c Eastern Cape Department of Health ^*  (Switzerland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF FORT HARE   (South Africa)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALGESIC AGENT;

ABDOMINAL SURGICAL INCISION; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; BREAST FEEDING; CESAREAN SECTION; CLINICAL OUTCOME; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEVER; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; JOEL-COHEN INCISION; LAPAROTOMY; LENGTH OF STAY; MATERNAL MORBIDITY; MATERNAL MORTALITY; MAYLARD MUSCLE-CUTTING INCISION; MOUCHEL INCISION; MUSCLE STRENGTH; NEWBORN CARE; OPERATION DURATION; OPERATIVE BLOOD LOSS; PFANNENSTIEL INCISION; POSTOPERATIVE ANALGESIA; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; WOUND INFECTION; ABDOMINAL WALL; ADVERSE EFFECTS; FEMALE; META ANALYSIS; PREGNANCY; PROCEDURES; SURGERY; METHODOLOGY;

ABDOMINAL WALL; CESAREAN SECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; LAPAROTOMY; PREGNANCY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84891702022     PISSN: None     EISSN: 1469493X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004453.pub3     Document Type: Review

References (53)

1. Berthet J, Peresse JF, Rosier P, Racinet C. Comparative study of Pfannenstiel's incision and transverse abdominal incision in gynecologic and obstetric surgery [Etude comparative de l'incision de Pfannenstiel et de i'incision transversale transmusculaire en chirurgie gynecologique et obstetricale]. Presse Medicale 1989;18(29):1431-3.
2. Franchi M, Ghezzi F, Raio L, Di Naro E, Miglierina M, Agosti M, et al.Joel-Cohen or Pfannenstiel incision at cesarean delivery: does it make a difference?. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2002;81:1040-6.
3. Ghezzi F, Franchi F, Raio L, Di Naro E, Balestreri D, Miglierina M, et al.Pfanenstiel or Joel-Cohen incision at cesarean delivery: a randomized clinical trial. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2001;184(1):S166.
4. Giacalone PL, Daures JP, Vignal J, Herisson C, Hedon B, Laffargue F. Pfannenstiel versus Maylard incision for cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2002;99:745-50.
5. Mathai M, Ambersheth S, George A. Comparison of two transverse abdominal incisions for cesarean delivery. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 2002;78:47-9.
6. Ansaloni L, Brundisini R, Morino G, Kiura A. Prospective, randomized, comparative study of Misgav-Ladach versus traditional cesarean section at Nazareth Hospital, Kenya. World Journal of Surgery 2001;25(9):1164-72.
7. Ayers JWT, Morley GW. Surgical incision for cesarean section. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1987;70:706-8.
8. Ayres-de-Campos D, Patricio B. Modifications to the misgav ladach technique for cesarean section [letter]. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2000;79:326-7.
9. Behrens D, Zimmerman S, Stoz F, Holzgreve W. Conventional versus cohen-stark: a randomised comparison of the two techniques for cesarean section. 20th Congress of the Swiss Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics; 1997 June; Lugano, Switzerland. 1997:14.
10. Bjorklund K, Kimaro M, Urassa E, Lindmark G. Introduction of the Misgav Ladach caesarean section at an African tertiary centre: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG: an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology 2000;107:209-16.
11. Dani C, Reali MF, Oliveto R, Temporin GF, Bertini G, Rubaltelli FF. Short-term outcome of newborn infants born by a modified procedure of cesarean section. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 1998;77:929-31.
12. Darj E, Nordstrom ML. The Misgav Ladach method for cesarean section compared to the Pfannenstiel method. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 1999;78:37-41.
13. Decavalas G, Papadopoulos V, Tzingounis V. A prospective comparison of surgical procedures in cesarean section. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 1997;76(167):13.
14. Direnzo GC, Rosati A, Cutuli A, Gerli S, Burnelli L, Liotta L, et al.A prospective trial of two procedures for performing cesarean section [abstract]. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2001;185(1):S124.
15. Falls FH. Recent advances in obstetric and gynecologic surgery. Journal of the American Medical Association 1958;166:1409-12.
16. Ferrari AG, Frigerio LG, Candotti G, Buscaglia M, Petrone M, Taglioretti A, et al.Can Joel-Cohen incision and single layer reconstruction reduce cesarean section morbidity?. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 2001;72:135-43.
17. Franchi M, Ghezzi F, Balestreri D, Beretta P, Maymon E, Miglierina M, et al.A randomized clinical trial of two surgical techniques for cesarean section. American Journal of Perinatology 1998;15(10):589-94.
18. Franchi M, Ghezzi F, Balestreri D, Miglierina M, Zanaboni F, Donadello N, et al.A randomized clinical trial of two surgical techniques for cesarean section. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1998;178:S31.
19. Gaucherand P, Bessai K, Sergeant P, Rudigoz RC. Towards simplified cesarean section? [Vers une simplification de l'operation cesarienne?]. Journal de Gynecologie, Obstetrique et Biologie de la Reproduction 2001;30:348-52.
20. Hagen A, Schmid O, Runkel S, Weitzel H, Hopp H. A randomized trial of two surgical techniques for cesarean section. European Journal Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 1999;86:S81.
21. Heimann J, Hitschold T, Muller K, Berle P. Randomized trial of the modified Misgav-Ladach and the conventional Pfannenstiel techniques for cesarean section [Modifizierte Misgav-Ladach-Technik der Sectio caesarea im Vergleich mit einer konventionellen Pfannenstiel-technik- eine prospektiv-randomisierte Studie an 240 Patientinnen eines Perinatalzentrums]. Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde 2000;60:242-50.
22. Hohlagschwandtner M, Ruecklinger E, Husslein P, Joura EA. Is the formation of a bladder flap at cesarean necessary?. A randomized trial. Obstetrics & Gynecology 2001;98:1089-92.
23. Mahawerawat S. Comparison of unintended uterine extension between cephalad-caudad and transverse blunt expansion techniques for low transverse cesarean delivery. Thai Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2010;18:120-5.
24. Meyer BA, Narain H, Morgan M, Jaekle RK. Comparison of electrocautery vs knife for elective cesarean in non-labored patients. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1997;176(1 Pt 2):S121.
25. Meyer BA, Narain H, Morgan M, Jaekle RK. Comparison of electrocautery vs knife for elective cesarean in labored patients. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1998;178(1 Pt 2):S80.
26. Moreira P, Moreau JC, Faye ME, Ka S, Kane Gueye SM, Faye EO, et al.Classic and Misgav-Ladach cesarean: results of a comparative study [Comparaison de deux techniques de cesarienne: cesarienne classique versus cesarienne Misgav Ladach]. Journal de Gynecologie, Obstetrique et Biologie de la Reproduction 2002;31:572-6.
27. Oguz S, Sener B, Ozcan S, Akyol D, Gokmen O. Nonfreeing of the lower leaf of the rectus sheath at caesarean section: a randomized controlled trial. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1998;38(3):317-8.
28. Redlich A, Koppe I. The "gentle caesarean section" - an alternative to the classical way of section. A prospective comparison between the classical technique and the method of Misgav Ladach ["Die sanfte Sectio" - Eine Alternative zur klassischen Sectiotechnik. Prospektiver Vergleich der klassischen Technik mit der Misgav-Ladach-Methode]. Zentralblatt fur Gynakologie 2001;123:638-43.
29. Wallin G, Fall O. Modified Joel-Cohen technique for caesarean delivery. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1999;106:221-6.
30. Wallin G, Fall O. Modified Joel-Cohen technique for caesarean section. A prospective randomised trial. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 1997;76(167 Suppl):24.
31. Xavier P, Ayres-de-Campos D, Reynolds A, Guimaraes M, Santos C, Patricio B. A randomised trial of the misgav-ladach versus the classical technique for the caesarean section: preliminary results [abstract]. European Journal Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 1999;86:S28-S29.
32. Juszczak E, Farrell B. The CORONIS Trial: international study of caesarean section surgical techniques. Trials 2011;112(Suppl 1):A103.
33. The CORONIS Trial Collaborative Group. The CORONIS trial. International study of caesarean section surgical techniques: a randomised fractional, factorial trial. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2007;7:24.
34. Alderdice F, McKenna D, Dornan J. Techniques and materials for skin closure in caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2003, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003577].
35. Anderson ER, Gates S. Techniques and materials for closure of the abdominal wall in caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2004, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004663.pub2].
36. Finan MA, Mastrogiannis DS, Spellacy WN. The Allis test for easy cesarean delivery. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1991;164:772-5.
37. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 4.2.5 [updated May 2005}. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2005. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
38. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org.
39. Holmgren G, Sjoholm L, Stark M. The misgav ladach method for cesarean section: method description. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 1999;78:615-21.
40. Joel-Cohen S. Abdominal and Vaginal Hysterectomy. 2nd Edition. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott, 1977:18-23.
41. Jacob-Jokhan D, Hofmeyr GJ. Extra-abdominal versus intra-abdominal repair of the uterine incision at caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2004, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000085.pub2].
42. Kendall SW, Brennan TG, Guillou PJ. Suture length to wound length ratio and the integrity of midline and lateral paramedian incisions. British Journal of Surgery 1991;78:705-7.
43. Kumar S, Dufresne RM, Van Schoor T. Human strength profile in flexion and extension. Spine 1995;20:160-8.
44. Mouchel J. Incision transversale transrectale en pratique gynecologique et obstetricale. La Nouvelle Press Medicale 1981;10:413-5.
45. Myerscough PR. Caesarean section: sterilization: hysterectomy. Munro Kerr's Operative Obstetrics. 10th Edition. London: Bailliere Tindall, 1982:295-319.
46. O'Grady JP, Veronikis DK, Chervenak FA, McCullough LB, Kanaan CM, Tilson JL. Cesarean delivery. In: O'Grady JP, Gimovsky ML editor(s). Operative Obstetrics. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1995:239-87.
47. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). 4.2 for Windows. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2003.
48. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). 5.1. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.
49. Sreenivasan KA. [Caesarean under local anaesthesia: a study of 1543 cases]. Conference Proceedings: 49th All India Congress of Obstetrics & Gynaecology; 2006; Kochi, Kerala. 2006:168. [: IP-9-2-0200-2-OBST].
50. WHO/UNFPA/UNICEF/World Bank. Managing complications in pregnancy and childbirth: a guide for midwives and doctors. WHO/UNFPA/UNICEF/World Bank; 2000. Report No.:WHO/RHR/00.7.
51. Wood RM, Simon H, Oz AU. Pelosi-type vs traditional cesarean delivery. A prospective comparision. Journal of Reproductive Medicine 1999;44:788-95.
52. Mathai M, Hofmeyr GJ. Abdominal surgical incisions for caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004453].
53. Mathai M, Hofmeyr GJ. Abdominal surgical incisions for caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004453.pub2].