Transverse uterine incision closure: One versus two layers

OBJECTIVE: 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. STUDY DESIGN: At our institution 906 women were randomized to closure of a low transverse cesarean incision wit...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 1992-10, Vol.167 (4), p.1108-1111
Hauptverfasser: Hauth, John C., Owen, John, Davis, Richard O.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:OBJECTIVE: 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. STUDY DESIGN: 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, χ 2 test of proportion, and Wilcoxon rank sum test were used to compare groups of patients. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: We recommend a one-layer closure when its use is anatomically feasible. ( Am J OBstetGYnecol 1992;167:1108–11.)
ISSN:0002-9378
1097-6868
DOI:10.1016/S0002-9378(12)80048-2