A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial of Single vs. Double Layer Closure of Hysterotomy at the Time of Cesarean Delivery: The Effect on Uterine Scar Thickness

Single- Versus Double-Layer Uterine Closure After Cesarean Section Delivery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cesarean section (CS) delivery is a common procedure, and its incidence is increasing globally. To compare single-layer (SL) with double-layer (DL) uterine closure techniques after cesarean section in terms of ultrasonographic findings and rate of CS complications. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Retrieved articles were screened, and relevant studies were included in a meta-analysis. Continuous data were pooled as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI), and dichotomous data were pooled as relative risk (RR) and 95% CI. Analysis was conducted using RevMan software (Version 5.4). Eighteen RCTs were included in our study. Pooled results favored DL uterine closure in terms of residual myometrial thickness (MD = -1.15; 95% CI -1.69, -0.60; P < 0.0001) and dysmenorrhea (RR = 1.36; 95% CI 1.02, 1.81; P = 0.04), while SL closure had shorter operation time than DL closure (MD = -2.25; 95% CI -3.29, -1.21; P < 0.00001). Both techniques had similar results in terms of uterine dehiscence or rupture (RR = 1.88; 95% CI 0.63, 5.62; P = 0.26), healing ratio (MD = -5.00; 95% CI -12.40, 2.39; P = 0.18), maternal infectious morbidity (RR = 0.94; 95% CI 0.66, 1.34; P = 0.72), hospital stay (MD = -0.12; 95% CI -0.30, 0.06; P = 0.18), and readmission rate (RR = 0.95; 95% CI 0.64, 1.40; P = 0.78). Double-layer uterine closure shows more residual myometrial thickness and lower incidence of dysmenorrhea than single-layer uterine closure of cesarean section scar. But single-layer closure has the advantage of the shorter operation time. Both methods have comparable blood loss amount, healing ratio, hospital stay duration, maternal infection risk, readmission rate, and uterine dehiscence or rupture risk.

Online survey on uterotomy closure techniques in caesarean section

OBJECTIVES

Uterine closure technique in caesarean section (CS) influences the rate of late complications in subsequent pregnancies. As no common recommendation on suture techniques exists, we developed a questionnaire to determine the techniques currently used and the frequencies of late complications.

METHODS

The online questionnaire consisted of 13 questions and was sent to 648 obstetric hospitals (level I-IV) in Germany. Number of CS, rate of vaginal birth after caesarean section (VBAC), the type of uterus suturing technique and the frequency of uterine dehiscences, ruptures and placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) were queried. The answers were anonymous, and results were evaluated descriptively.

RESULTS

The response rate was 24.7%. The mean CS rate was 27.3% (±6.2), the repeat CS rate 33.2% (±18.1). After CS, 46.2% (±20.2) women delivered vaginally. To close the uterotomy, 74.4% of hospitals used single layer continuous sutures, 16.3% single layer locked sutures, 3.8% interrupted sutures, 3.1% double layer continuous sutures and 2.5% used other suture techniques. The percentages of observed uterine dehiscences did not differ significantly between the different levels of care nor did the uterotomy suture techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no uniform suturing technique in Germany. A detailed description of suture technique in surgery reports is required to evaluate complications in subsequent pregnancies. National online surveys on obstetric topics are feasible and facilitate the discussion on the need to define a standardized uterine closure technique for CS.

Hysteroscopic Removal of Intrauterine-retained Suture Material Causing Pelvic Inflammatory Disease

Retained intrauterine objects are rare causes of persistent vaginal discharge and pelvic inflammatory disease. Hysteroscopy is a minimally invasive technique used for removing these materials. A 47-year-old female who had recurrent vaginal discharge was admitted to our emergency department with pelvic pain. Retained nonabsorbable suture material was observed during her vaginal examination. After treating with intravenous antibiotics, operative hysteroscopy was performed, and the material was removed from the lower segment of the uterus.

The Case for Standardizing Cesarean Delivery Technique: Seeing the Forest for the Trees

In this Commentary, we explain the case for a standardized cesarean delivery surgical technique. There are three strong arguments for a standardized approach to cesarean delivery, the most common major abdominal surgery performed in the world. First, standardization within institutions improves safety, efficiency, and effectiveness in health care delivery. Second, surgical training among obstetrics and gynecology residents would become more consistent across hospitals and regions, and proficiency in performing cesarean delivery measurable. Finally, standardization would strengthen future trials of cesarean delivery technique by minimizing the potential for aspects of the surgery which are not being studied to bias results. Before 2013, more than 155 randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses or systematic reviews were published comparing various aspects of cesarean delivery surgical technique. Since 2013, an additional 216 similar studies have strengthened those recommendations and offered evidence to recommend additional cesarean delivery techniques. However, this amount of cesarean delivery technique data creates a forest for the trees problem, making it difficult for a clinician to synthesize this volume of data. In response to this difficulty, we propose a comprehensive, evidence-based and standardized approach to cesarean delivery technique.

Does ultrasound-guided intervention during repeat cesarean sections improve uterine scar architecture and reduce the number of scars? A prospective controlled clinical intervention trial

Purpose To evaluate whether intraoperative ultrasound-guided detection and resection of the uterine scar during repeat/second cesarean can reduce the number of scars and improve uterine scar architecture. Materials and methods A prospective controlled clinical intervention trial was performed with the following groups: control group 1 (CS1-G): first cesarean; control group 2 (CS2-G): second cesarean utilizing the usual procedure and intervention group (Int-G): repeat/second cesarean with intervention. Transvaginal ultrasound scans were performed 6-9 months after each cesarean. Both primary (double scarring rate) and secondary outcomes [deficiency ratio=d/(b+d)] were analyzed. The deficiency ratio describes the thinning of the remaining myometrium (d=residual myometrial thickness) over the "apparent" defect (b=scar depth). Results In total, 124 of the 156 recruited women were examined, eight were excluded from analysis. The double scarring rate decreased from 42.9% (12/28) in CS2-G to 7.1% (2/28) in the Int-G [difference: 35.8%; 95% confidence interval (CI) (13.2, 54.5); P=0.002]. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed a significant difference between CS2-G and the Int-G in the deficiency ratio adjusted for elective/primary cesareans, with thicker remaining myometrium over the scar defect in the Int-G [difference: -0.24; 95% CI (-0.34, -0.15); P<0.001]. Conclusion Ultrasound-guided resection of the uterine scar area during repeat cesareans reduces the scarring rate and improves thickness of the remaining myometrium as detected by ultrasonography 6-9 months postoperatively.