CC BY 4.0 · Surg J (N Y) 2016; 02(04): e119-e125
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1594247
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Surgical Techniques at Cesarean Delivery: A U.S. Survey

Deirdre J. Lyell
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California
,
Michael Power
2   Research Department, American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Washington, District of Columbia
,
Katie Murtough
2   Research Department, American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Washington, District of Columbia
,
Amen Ness
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California
,
Britta Anderson
2   Research Department, American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Washington, District of Columbia
,
Kristine Erickson
2   Research Department, American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Washington, District of Columbia
,
Jay Schulkin
2   Research Department, American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Washington, District of Columbia
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

23 March 2016

13 October 2016

Publication Date:
14 November 2016 (online)

Abstract

Objective To assess the frequency of surgical techniques at cesarean delivery (CD) among U.S. obstetricians.

Methods Members of the American College of Obstetrician Gynecologists were randomly selected and e-mailed an online survey that assessed surgical closure techniques, demographics, and reasons. Data were analyzed using SPSS (IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, United States), descriptive statistics, and analysis of variance.

Results Our response rate was 53%, and 247 surveys were analyzed. A similar number of respondents either “always or usually” versus “rarely or never” reapproximate the rectus muscles (38.4% versus 43.3%, p = 0.39), and close parietal peritoneum (42.5% versus 46.9%, p = 0.46). The most frequently used techniques were double-layer hysterotomy closure among women planning future children (73.3%) and suturing versus stapling skin (67.6%); the least frequent technique was closure of visceral peritoneum (12.2%). Surgeons who perform double-layer hysterotomy closure had fewer years in practice (15.0 versus 18.7 years, p = 0.021); surgeons who close visceral peritoneum were older (55.5 versus 46.4 years old, p < 0.001) and had more years in practice (23.8 versus 13.8 years practice; p < 0.001).

Conclusion Similar numbers of obstetricians either reapproximate or leave open the rectus muscles and parietal peritoneum at CD, suggesting that wide variation in practice exists. Surgeon demographics and safety concerns play a role in some techniques.

 
  • References

  • 1 Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman MJK. , et al. Births: final data for 2012. National Vital Statistics Reports. Vol. 62. No. 9. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2013
  • 2 Irion O, Luzuy F, Béguín F. Nonclosure of the visceral and parietal peritoneum at caesarean section: a randomised controlled trial. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1996; 103 (07) 690-694
  • 3 Nagele F, Karas H, Spitzer D. , et al. Closure or nonclosure of the visceral peritoneum at cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 174 (04) 1366-1370
  • 4 Lyell DJ, Caughey AB, Hu E, Daniels K. Peritoneal closure at primary cesarean delivery and adhesions. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106 (02) 275-280
  • 5 Lyell DJ. Adhesions and perioperative complications of repeat cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011; 205 (6, Suppl): S11-S18
  • 6 Lyell DJ, Caughey AB, Hu E, Blumenfeld Y, El-Sayed YY, Daniels K. Rectus muscle and visceral peritoneum closure at cesarean delivery and intraabdominal adhesions. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 206 (06) 515.e1-515.e5
  • 7 Blumenfeld YJ, Caughey AB, El-Sayed YY, Daniels K, Lyell DJ. Single- versus double-layer hysterotomy closure at primary caesarean delivery and bladder adhesions. BJOG 2010; 117 (06) 690-694
  • 8 Greenberg MB, Daniels K, Blumenfeld YJ, Caughey AB, Lyell DJ. Do adhesions at repeat cesarean delay delivery of the newborn?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011; 205 (04) 380.e1-380.e5
  • 9 Dahlke JD, Mendez-Figueroa H, Rouse DJ, Berghella V, Baxter JK, Chauhan SP. Evidence-based surgery for cesarean delivery: an updated systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 209 (04) 294-306
  • 10 Hofmeyr JG, Novikova N, Mathai M, Shah A. Techniques for cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009; 201 (05) 431-444
  • 11 Berghella V, Baxter JK, Chauhan SP. Evidence-based surgery for cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 193 (05) 1607-1617
  • 12 Tully L, Gates S, Brocklehurst P, McKenzie-McHarg K, Ayers S. Surgical techniques used during caesarean section operations: results of a national survey of practice in the UK. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2002; 102 (02) 120-126
  • 13 Demers S, Roberge S, Afiuni YA, Chaillet N, Girard I, Bujold E. Survey on uterine closure and other techniques for Caesarean section among Quebec's obstetrician-gynaecologists. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2013; 35 (04) 329-333
  • 14 The CORONIS Collaborative Group. CORONIS–International study of caesarean section surgical techniques: the follow-up study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2013; 13: 215
  • 15 CAESAR study collaborative group. Caesarean section surgical techniques: a randomised factorial trial (CAESAR). BJOG 2010; 117 (11) 1366-1376
  • 16 Roset E, Boulvain M, Irion O. Nonclosure of the peritoneum during caesarean section: long-term follow-up of a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2003; 108 (01) 40-44
  • 17 Ghahiry A, Rezaei F, Karimi Khouzani R, Ashrafinia M. Comparative analysis of long-term outcomes of Misgav Ladach technique cesarean section and traditional cesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2012; 38 (10) 1235-1239
  • 18 Woytoń J, Florjański J, Zimmer M. [Nonclosure of the visceral peritoneum during Cesarean sections]. Ginekol Pol 2000; 71 (10) 1250-1254 Polish.
  • 19 Mackeen AD, Berghella V, Larsen ML. Techniques and materials for skin closure in caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 11: CD003577