Uterine closure with unlocked suture in cesarean section: Safety and quality

Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2014, Pages

  Turan, Guluzar Arzu ^a   Gur, Esra Bahar ^a   Tatar, Sumeyra ^a   Gokduman, Ayse ^a   Guclu, Serkan ^a  

^a SIFA UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Cesarean section; Niche; Surgical techniques; Suture techniques; Ultrasonography

Indexed keywords

CREATINE KINASE; HEMOGLOBIN;

ABDOMINAL WALL CLOSURE; ADULT; ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CREATINE KINASE BLOOD LEVEL; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HEALING; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEMOSTASIS; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OBSTETRIC HEMORRHAGE; OPERATIVE BLOOD LOSS; PATIENT SAFETY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCAR FORMATION; SUTURING METHOD; UTERUS SURGERY;

EID: 84897526906     PISSN: 1682024X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.12669/pjms.303.4545     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Dodd JM, Anderson ER, Gates S. Surgical techniques for uterine incision and uterine closure at the time of cesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;(3):CD 004732. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD004732.pub2.
2. Bujold E, Goyet M, Marcoux S, Brassard N, Cormier B, Hamilton E, et al. The role of uterine closure in the risk of uterine rupture. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(1):43-50. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181e41be3.
3. Roberge S, Chaillet N, Boutin A, Moore L, Jastrow N, Brassard N, et al. Single-versus double-layer closure of the hysterotomy incision during cesarean delivery and risk of uterine rupture. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2011;115(1):5-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2011.04.013.
4. Jelsema RD, Wittingen JA, VanderKolk KJ. Continuous, non locking, single-layer repair of the low transverse uterine incision. J Reprod Med. 1993;38(5):393-396.
5. Osser OV, Jokubkiene L, Valentin L. High prevalence of defects in Cesarean section scars at transvaginal ultrasound examination. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;34(1):90-97. DOI: 10.1002/uog.6395.
6. Yasmin S, Sadaf J, Fatima N. Impact of methods for uterine incision closure on repeat cesarean section scar of lower uterine segment. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2011;21(9):522-526. DOI: 09.2011/JCPSP.522526.
7. Jastrow N, Chaillet N, Roberge S, Morency AM, Lacasse Y, Bujold E. Sonographic lower uterine segment thickness and risk of uterine scar defect: a systematic review. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2010;32(4):321-327.
8. Osser OV, Valentin L. Clinical importance of appearance of cesarean hysterotomy scar at transvaginal ultrasonography in non pregnant women. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117(3):525-532. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318209abf0.
9. Varner M. Cesarean scar imaging and prediction of subsequent obstetric complications. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2012;55(4):988-996. DOI: 10.1097/GRF.0b013e318263c699.
10. Clark JF, Khuchua Z, Kuznetsov A, Saks VA, Ventura-Clapier R. Compartmentation of creatine kinase isoenzymes in myometrium of gravid guinea-pig. J Physiol. 1993;466:553-572.
11. Banu NS, Gaze DC, Bruce H, Collinson PO, Belli AM, Manyonda IT. Markers of muscle ischemia, necrosis, and inflammation following uterine artery embolization in the treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;196(3):213.e1-5.
12. Landon MB. Predicting uterine rupture in women undergoing trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery. Semin Perinatol. 2010;34(4):267-271. DOI: 10.1053/j. semperi.2010.03.005.
13. Rodrigues SP, Horeman T, Dankelman J, van den Dobbelsteen JJ, Jansen FW. Suturing intra abdominal organs: when do we cause tissue damage? Surg Endosc. 2012;26(4):1005-1009. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-011-1986-5.
14. Gül A, Simşek Y, Uǧraş S, Gül T. Transverse uterine incision non-closure versus closure: an experimental study in sheep. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2000;79(10):813-817.
15. Hudic I, Bujold E, Fatusic Z, Roberge S, Mandzic A, Fatusic J. Risk of uterine rupture following locked vs unlocked single-layer closure. Med Arh. 2012;66(6):412-414.
16. Liras G, Diaz V, Alvarez C, Arenas J, Sanz R, Martinez V. Total creatine kinase (CK) and CK-B activity in maternal blood and cord-blood samples after vaginal and cesarean births. Clin Chem. 1988;34(7):1498-4199.
17. Schulpis KH, Margeli A, Akalestos A, Vlachos GD, Partsinevelos GA, Papastamataki M, et al. Effects of mode of delivery on maternal-neonatal plasma antioxidant status and on protein S100B serum concentrations. Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2006;66(8):733-742.
18. Hebisch G, Kirkinen P, Haldemann R, Pääkköö E, Huch A, Huch R. Comparative study of the lower uterine segment after Cesareansection using ultrasound and magnetic resonance to mography. Ultraschall Med. 1994;15(3):112-116.
19. Regnard C, Nosbusch M, Fellemans C, Benali N, vanRysselberghe M, Barlow P, et al. Cesarean section scar evaluation by saline contrast sonohysterography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004;23(3):289-292.
20. Conn J Jr, Oyasu R, Welsh M, Beal JM. Vicryl (polyglactin 910) synthetic absorbable sutures. Am J Surg. 1974;128(1):19-23.