Unintended Extension of the Lower Segment Uterine Incision at Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Comparison of Sharp versus Blunt Techniques

Abstract

Objective This study compared two methods of expanding the uterine incision at the time of cesarean delivery, which is associated with the risk of unintended extension.

Study Design This randomized trial included 1,076 women who underwent elective cesarean delivery. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of unintended extension related to the method used for expanding the uterine incision.

Results Participants in both groups (blunt vs. sharp) had similar demographic and clinical characteristics. The incidence of unintended extension (8.8% vs. 4.8%; p = 0.009), mean estimated blood loss (853.67 ± 42 mL vs. 664.80 ± 38 mL; p = 0.001), and blood loss >1000 mL (11.4% vs. 6.8%; p = 0.009) was significantly higher in the sharp group compared with the blunt group. No difference in transfusions (7.5% vs. 6.3%; p = 0.440) or the need for additional supertonic agents (16% vs. 12.9%; p = 0.144) was noted.

Conclusion Sharp expansion of the uterine incision was related to a higher risk of unintended extension and maternal blood loss. Because blunt expansion is associated with a lower risk for unintended extension and maternal blood loss, it should be the first option during elective cesarean delivery.

Keywords

cesarean - extension - sharp - blunt

• References

• 1 Murray SF, Pradenas FS. Health sector reform and rise of caesarean birth in Chile. Lancet 1997; 349 (9044) 64
• 2 Pai M, Sundaram P, Radhakrishnan KK, Thomas K, Muliyil JP. A high rate of caesarean sections in an affluent section of Chennai: is it cause for concern?. Natl Med J India 1999; 12 (4) 156-158
• 3 Betrán AP, Merialdi M, Lauer JA , et al. Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, regional and national estimates. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2007; 21 (2) 98-113
• 4 Çicek N, Çelik Ç, Kösüş N, Görkemli H, Acar A, Akyürek C. Our rate of caesarean births. Selcuk Med J 2001; 17: 117-122
• 5 Greenhill JP. Obstetrics. 11th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1995: 986-1033
• 6 Jackson NV, Irvine LM. The influence of maternal request on the elective caesarean section rate. J Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 18 (2) 115-119
• 7 Rubin GL, Peterson HB, Rochat RW, McCarthy BJ, Terry JS. Maternal death after cesarean section in Georgia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1981; 139 (6) 681-685
• 8 Landon MB. Caesarean delivery. In: Gabbe SG, Niebyl JR, Simpson JL, , eds. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone; 2007: 486-491
• 9 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists . Washington DC. Postpartum hemorrhage. ACOG Technical Bulletin. 1998; 243.
• 10 Hidar S, Jerbi M, Hafsa A, Slama A, Bibi M, Khaïri H. Impact de la technique d'hysterotomie au cours de la cesarienne sur le saignement perioperatoire: un essai prospectif randomize. Rev Med Liege 2007; 62 (4) 235-238
• 11 Rodriguez AI, Porter KB, O'Brien WF. Blunt versus sharp expansion of the uterine incision in low-segment transverse cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 171 (4) 1022-1025
• 12 Magann EF, Chauhan SP, Bufkin L, Field K, Roberts WE, Martin JN. Intra-operative hemorrhage by blunt versus sharp expansion of the uterine incision at caesarean delivery: a randomised clinical trial. International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2002; 109: 448-452
• 13 Sekhavat L, Dehghani Firouzabadi R, Mojiri P. Effect of expansion technique of uterine incision on maternal blood loss in cesarean section. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2010; 282 (5) 475-479
• 14 Hameed N, Ali MA. Maternal blood loss by expansion of uterine incision at caesarean section—a comparison between sharp and blunt techniques. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2004; 16 (3) 47-50
• 15 Dodd JM, Anderson ER, Gates S. Surgical techniques for uterine incision and uterine closure at the time of caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008; 16 (3) 32-47
• 16 Shook PR, Schultz JR, Reynolds JD, Spahn TE, DeBali P. Estimating blood loss for cesarean section: how accurate are we?. Anesthesiology 2003; 98 (Suppl. 01) 1
• 17 Xu LL, Chau AM, Zuschmann A. Blunt vs. sharp uterine expansion at lower segment cesarean section delivery: a systematic review with metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 208 (1) e1-e8
• 18 Mousa HA, Cording V, Alfirevic Z. Risk factors and interventions associated with major primary postpartum hemorrhage unresponsive to first-line conventional therapy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2008; 87 (6) 652-661
• 19 Bais JM, Eskes M, Pel M, Bonsel GJ, Bleker OP. Postpartum haemorrhage in nulliparous women: incidence and risk factors in low and high risk women. A Dutch population-based cohort study on standard (> or = 500 ml) and severe (> or = 1000 ml) postpartum haemorrhage. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2004; 115 (2) 166-172