Transverse uterine incision closure: one versus two layers. Comparative study of single layer and conventional closure of uterine incision in cesarean section. Closure vs non-closure of the visceral and parietal peritoneum at cesarean delivery: 16 year study. A randomized comparison of total or supracervical hysterectomy: surgical complications and clinical outcomes. Abdominal or vaginal hysterectomy for enlarged uteri: a randomized clinical trial. Randomized study of non-closure of peritoneum in lower segment cesarean section. A randomized, controlled study comparing the cosmetic outcome of a new wound closure device with Prolene suture closing caesarean wounds. Cosmetic outcomes of various skin closure methods following cesarean delivery: a randomized trial. Ultrasound evaluation of the uterine scar after cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial of one- and two-layer closure.
Closure of a low transverse cesarean incision with one layer of suture results in less operating time, better hemostasis, and less infectious morbidity than a two-layer closure.
                At our institution 906 women were randomized to closure of a low transverse cesarean incision with either one continuous layer of a locking No. 1 chromic suture and a CTX needle (n = 457) or two continuous layers of No. 1 chromic suture with the first layer locked (n = 449). The Student t test, chi 2 test of proportion, and Wilcoxon rank sum test were used to compare groups of patients.
                A one-layer closure required less operative time, 43.8 versus 47.5 minutes (p = 0.0003). Fewer additional uterine hemostatic sutures were required in 369 women in whom either the one- (n = 179) or the two-layer (n = 190) closure did not achieve hemostasis (p = 0.046). Endometritis was similar in both groups, 83 (22%) in the one-layer group versus 65 (18%) in the two-layer group (p = 0.17). In no outcome assessment was the two-layer closure superior to the one-layer closure.
                We recommend a one-layer closure when its use is anatomically feasible. Single layer interrupted suture closure of uterine wound incisions represent a viable choice over conventional closure since the operation not only has benefits in case of performance but also possesses a rational basis for the avoidance of ischemia of the wound, infection and hematoma formation. There is a distinct advantage of single interrupted suture closure over conventional closure because there is a substantially higher number of normal hysterograms in this group showing good integrity of the scar in the uterus. To determine whether non-closure of visceral and parietal peritoneum at LSCS has advantages over peritoneal closure with regard to postoperative complication and adhesions.
                Prospective randomized controlled trial.
                Paholpolpayuhasena Hospital, Kanchanaburi province, Thailand
                Three hundred and sixty full-term pregnant women undergoing first cesarean section were divided into 3 groups (N = 120). Group A: non-closure of both visceral and parietal peritoneum. Group B. non-closure of only visceral peritoneum. Group C: closure of both visceral and parietal peritoneum. Postoperative complications were compared. Adhesions were evaluated in 65 patients returning for a second LSCS and compared for severity of adhesions. The three groups were compared using statistical analysis.
                There was no significant statistical difference between group A and C, group B and C for postoperative complications or number of adhesion formation. However, adhesions in the closure group were more severe.
                Closure of visceral and parietal peritoneum has no benefit over non-closure of visceral peritoneum and non-closure of both visceral and parietal peritoneum at LSCS. To compare surgical complications and clinical outcomes after total versus supracervical abdominal hysterectomy for control of abnormal uterine bleeding, symptomatic uterine leiomyomata, or both.
                We conducted a randomized intervention trial in four US clinical centers among 135 patients who had abdominal hysterectomy for symptomatic uterine leiomyomata, abnormal uterine bleeding refractory to hormonal treatment, or both. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a total or supracervical hysterectomy performed using the surgeon's customary technique. Using an intention-to-treat approach, we compared surgical complications and clinical outcomes for 2 years after randomization.
                Sixty-eight participants were assigned to supracervical hysterectomy (SCH) and 67 to total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH). Hysterectomy by either technique led to statistically significant reductions in most symptoms, including pelvic pain or pressure, back pain, urinary incontinence, and voiding dysfunction. Patients randomly assigned to (SCH) tended to have more hospital readmissions than those randomized to TAH, but this difference was not statistically significant. There were no statistically significant differences in the rate of complications, degree of symptom improvement, or activity limitation. Participants weighing more than 100 kg at study entry were twice as likely to be readmitted to the hospital during the 2-year follow-up period (relative risk [RR] 2.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06, 4.48, P=.034).
                We found no statistically significant differences between (SCH) and TAH in surgical complications and clinical outcomes during 2 years of follow-up. The purpose of this study was to compare advantages, disadvantages, and outcomes in patients who undergo vaginal or abdominal hysterectomy for enlarged symptomatic uteri.
                In a prospective, randomized study, 60 vaginal hysterectomies (study group) were compared with 59 abdominal hysterectomies (control group); all of the hysterectomies were performed for symptomatic uterine fibroids from January 1997 through December 2000. We excluded from the study the other common causes of hysterectomy such as prolapse, bleeding, adenomyosis, and endometrial or cervical carcinoma. In both groups, uterine weights ranged from 200 g to 1300 g. For enlarged uteri, vaginal hysterectomies were performed with the use of volume reduction techniques: Intramyometrial coring, corporal bisection, and morcellation. The evaluated parameters included patient age, weight, parity, uterine weight, operative time, blood loss, demand for analgesics, eventual surgical complications, length of admission, and hospital charges. The Mann-Whitney U test and chi(2) tests were applied for statistical analysis. Probability values of <.05 were considered statistically significant.
                There were no major differences in patient age, weight, parity, and uterine weight between the two groups. Operative time was significantly lower for the vaginal route as compared with the abdominal route (86 minutes vs 102 minutes, P <.001). No intraoperative complications were noted both in the study and control groups or the control group. Surgical bleeding (expressed by hemoglobin loss) was not significantly different between the two groups. In the postoperative period, we found a higher incidence of fever (30.5% vs 16.6%, P <.05) and demand for analgesics (86% vs 66%, P <.05) in the abdominal group as compared with the vaginal group. Significant advantages of vaginal hysterectomy were a reduction in the hospital stay (3 days vs 4 days, P <.001) and cost.
                These results should lead to the choice of vaginal hysterectomy as a valid alternative to the abdominal hysterectomy, even for enlarged uteri. The advantages of non-closure of the visceral and parietal peritoneum at lower segment cesarean section seems to be evident but in the reports published so far, the number of patients studied has been relatively small and the follow-up periods short. It is obviously of value to reconfirm such important observation in several institutions and therefore, in 1991, we decided to study non-closure of the peritoneum in lower segment cesarean section in a large series of patients with long-term follow-up of at least one year.
                A prospective randomized study of 361 patients undergoing lower segment cesarean section in a University Affiliated Hospital, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates. The operative technique was randomized to include either non-closure of both visceral and parietal peritoneum (study group, n = 179) or closure of both layers (control group, n = 182). Patients were followed up according to a study protocol. The nursing staff and the obstetricians responsible for data collection were unaware as to which of the two groups the patients belonged to. Student-t test and Chi-square test were used for statistical analysis of the results, where appropriate, with a p < 0.05 considered probability level to reflect significant differences.
                Postoperative febrile morbidity and wound infection were significantly lower in the study group as compared to the control group (p < 0.001 and p < 0.05 respectively). The incidence of wound dehiscence, urinary tract infection and the time to opening of the bowels postoperatively were similar in the two groups. In the non-closure group, the average operating time was significantly shorter by 7.9 minutes (p < 0.01) and the hospital stay was one day less (p < 0.01). There were no patients with late postoperative complications or readmissions during 2-5 years of follow-up that could be attributed to complications associated with lower segment cesarean section.
                Non-closure of the visceral and parietal peritoneum at lower segment cesarean section is associated with fewer postoperative complications, is more cost effective and is simpler than the traditional operative technique of closing both peritoneal layers. A prospective, randomised study was conducted to compare the wound closure performance and cosmetic outcome of caesarean section wounds closed with traditional Prolene suture or a new wound closure device (Leukosan(®) SkinLink). Sixty-one patients referred to primary section were allocated to wound closure with either Leukosan(®) SkinLink or Prolene suture. Cosmetic outcome as the primary measure was evaluated by the patient, the surgeon as well as by independent examiners blinded to the method of wound closure. Evaluations were recorded at 3, 6 and 12 months following wound closure. Both methods of wound closure scored equally high on the visual analogue scale for cosmetic evaluation at the 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-ups as assessed by the patient, surgeon and the blinded observers. The study has shown that innovative methods for wound closure compared with traditional methods such as suture providing excellent cosmetic results represent a valid alternative to physician and patient for surgical incisions.
                © 2011 The Authors. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and Medicalhelplines.com Inc. The objective of the study was to compare scar quality associated with different types of wound closure methods after cesarean section (CS).
                Patients were randomized to have skin closure following CS with either staples or 3 different types of subcuticular sutures. Scar quality was evaluated 2 and 6 months postoperatively. The Vancouver Scar Scale, the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), and a visual analog scale were used as scar assessment tools.
                Of the 180 patients who were recruited, 123 successfully completed the study. No difference in both subjective and objective scar rating was detected across groups at either 2 months or 6 months. In the overall study population, objective scores correlated with patient rating, and correlation was strongest between the observer and patient components of the POSAS (r = 0.48).
                In women undergoing CS, stapled wounds and those closed with subcuticular sutures result in equivalent cosmetic appearance of the scar.
                Copyright (c) 2010 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved. To survey the uterine scar thickness by ultrasonography in women randomly assigned to one- or two-layer hysterotomy closure after primary cesarean delivery.
                This was a randomized, blinded trial of uterine scar closure with ultrasonographic follow-up. Thirty consecutive patients undergoing primary cesarean delivery were enrolled and randomly assigned to one- or two-layer closure of the hysterotomy. Ultrasound surveillance of the uterine scar thickness was performed at baseline (before surgery) and 48 hours, 2 weeks, and 6 weeks post partum.
                Patient compliance with the postpartum surveillance protocol was 90%, and the uterine scar was visualized in 99% of attempted ultrasonographic examinations. There were no differences between groups at baseline or at any of the follow-up evaluations. An initial 5- to 6-fold increase in uterine scar thickness was observed, followed by a gradual decrease with the 6-week measurements still thicker than baseline. Repeated measures analysis of variance showed significant variation across time points starting either at baseline (P<.001) or at 48 hour postoperatively (P<.001), but this variation did not depend on closure type (P=.79 for all visits and P=.81 beginning with 48-hour postoperative time point).
                The process of uterine scar remodeling can be successfully monitored by ultrasonography. Uterine scar thickness diminishes progressively after both one- or two-layer closure but does not vary with mode of hysterotomy closure. The uterine scar thickness remains increased even at 6 weeks post partum, suggesting that the process of uterine scar remodeling extends beyond the traditional postpartum period. CLINCAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00224250
There is no evidence from this review to make definitive conclusions about which method of uterine closure offers greater advantages, if any. However, these results are based on too few and too small studies to detect differences in rare, but severe, complications.
[Note: The 12 citations in the awaiting classification section of the review may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.]