Dataset Information

Caesarean section: could different transverse abdominal incision techniques influence postpartum pain and subsequent quality of life? A systematic review.

ABSTRACT: The choice of the type of abdominal incision performed in caesarean delivery is made chiefly on the basis of the individual surgeon's experience and preference. A general consensus on the most appropriate surgical technique has not yet been reached. The aim of this systematic review of the literature is to compare the two most commonly used transverse abdominal incisions for caesarean delivery, the Pfannenstiel incision and the modified Joel-Cohen incision, in terms of acute and chronic post-surgical pain and their subsequent influence in terms of quality of life. Electronic database searches formed the basis of the literature search and the following databases were searched in the time frame between January 1997 and December 2013: MEDLINE, EMBASE Sciencedirect and the Cochrane Library. Key search terms included: "acute pain", "chronic pain", "Pfannenstiel incision", "Misgav-Ladach", "Joel Cohen incision", in combination with "Caesarean Section", "abdominal incision", "numbness", "neuropathic pain" and "nerve entrapment". Data on 4771 patients who underwent caesarean section (CS) was collected with regards to the relation between surgical techniques and postoperative outcomes defined as acute or chronic pain and future pregnancy desire. The Misgav-Ladach incision was associated with a significant advantage in terms of reduction of post-surgical acute and chronic pain. It was indicated as the optimal technique in view of its characteristic of reducing lower pelvic discomfort and pain, thus improving quality of life and future fertility desire. Further studies which are not subject to important bias like pre-existing chronic pain, non-standardized analgesia administration, variable length of skin incision and previous abdominal surgery are required.

SUBMITTER: Gizzo S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4315586 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Caesarean section: could different transverse abdominal incision techniques influence postpartum pain and subsequent quality of life? A systematic review.

Gizzo Salvatore S Andrisani Alessandra A Noventa Marco M Di Gangi Stefania S Quaranta Michela M Cosmi Erich E D'Antona Donato D Nardelli Giovanni Battista GB Ambrosini Guido G

PloS one 20150203 2

The choice of the type of abdominal incision performed in caesarean delivery is made chiefly on the basis of the individual surgeon's experience and preference. A general consensus on the most appropriate surgical technique has not yet been reached. The aim of this systematic review of the literature is to compare the two most commonly used transverse abdominal incisions for caesarean delivery, the Pfannenstiel incision and the modified Joel-Cohen incision, in terms of acute and chronic post-sur ...[more]

PMID: 25646621

Similar Datasets

Project description:Study questionIs first birth Caesarean delivery associated with a lower likelihood of subsequent childbearing when compared with first birth vaginal delivery?Summary answerIn this study of US women whose first delivery was in 2000, those who had a Caesarean delivery were less likely to have a subsequent live birth than those who delivered vaginally.What is already knownSome studies have reported lower birth rates subsequent to Caesarean delivery in comparison with vaginal delivery, while other studies have reported no difference.Study design, size, durationWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of 52 498 women who had a first singleton live birth in the State of Pennsylvania, USA in 2000 and were followed to the end of 2008 via Pennsylvania birth certificate records to identify subsequent live births during the 8- to 9-year follow-up period.Participants/materials, setting, methodsBirth certificate records of first singleton births were linked to the hospital discharge data for each mother and newborn, and linked to all birth certificate records for each mother's subsequent deliveries which occurred in 2000 to the end of 2008. Poisson regression models were used to evaluate the association between first birth factors and whether or not there was a subsequent live birth during the follow-up period.Main results and the role of chanceOver an average of 8.5 years of follow-up, 40.2% of women with a Caesarean first birth did not have a subsequent live birth, compared with 33.1% of women with a vaginal first birth (risk ratio (RR): 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.18-1.25). Adjustment for the demographic confounders of maternal age, race, education, marital status and health insurance coverage attenuated the RR to 1.16 (95% CI: 1.13-1.19). Specific pregnancy and childbirth-related complications associated with not having a subsequent live birth included diabetes-related disorders, abnormalities of organs and soft tissues of the pelvis, fetal abnormalities, premature or prolonged rupture of membranes, hypertensive disorders, amnionitis, fetal distress and other maternal health problems. However, adjustment for the pregnancy and childbirth complications had little effect on the RR of not having a subsequent live birth (RR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.11-1.19).Limitations, reasons for cautionWe were unable to distinguish between women who did not have a subsequent live birth and those who moved out of the state, which may have introduced a selection bias if those who had Caesarean births were more likely to emigrate than those who delivered vaginally. In addition we were unable to measure pre-pregnancy body mass index, weight gain during pregnancy and prior infertility, which would have been helpful in our efforts to reduce selection bias.Wider implications of the findingsThe results of this study provide further corroboration of previous studies that have reported reduced fertility subsequent to Caesarean section in comparison with vaginal delivery.Study funding/potential competing interestsThis study was funded by the US National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD, R01-HD052990). No competing interests are declared.

Project description:BackgroundThe CORONIS trial reported differences in short-term maternal morbidity when comparing five pairs of alternative surgical techniques for caesarean section. Here we report outcomes at 3 years follow-up.MethodsThe CORONIS trial was a pragmatic international 2 × 2 × 2 × 2× 2 non-regular fractional, factorial, unmasked, randomised controlled trial done at 19 sites in Argentina, Chile, Ghana, India, Kenya, Pakistan, and Sudan. Pregnant women were eligible if they were to undergo their first or second caesarean section through a planned transverse abdominal incision. Women were randomly assigned by a secure web-based allocation system to one intervention from each of the three assigned pairs. All investigators, surgeons, and participants were unmasked to treatment allocation. In this follow-up study, we compared outcomes at 3 years following blunt versus sharp abdominal entry, exteriorisation of the uterus for repair versus intra-abdominal repair, single versus double layer closure of the uterus, closure versus non-closure of the peritoneum, and chromic catgut versus polyglactin-910 for uterine repair. Outcomes included pelvic pain; deep dyspareunia; hysterectomy and outcomes of subsequent pregnancies. Outcomes were assessed masked to the original trial allocation. This trial is registered with the Current Controlled Trials registry, number ISRCTN31089967.FindingsBetween Sept 1, 2011, and Sept 30, 2014, 13,153 (84%) women were followed-up for a mean duration of 3·8 years (SD 0·86). For blunt versus sharp abdominal entry there was no evidence of a difference in risk of abdominal hernias (adjusted RR 0·66; 95% CI 0·39-1·11). We also recorded no evidence of a difference in risk of death or serious morbidity of the children born at the time of trial entry (0·99, 0·83-1·17). For exteriorisation of the uterus versus intra-abdominal repair there was no evidence of a difference in risk of infertility (0·91, 0·71-1·18) or of ectopic pregnancy (0·50, 0·15-1·66). For single versus double layer closure of the uterus there was no evidence of a difference in maternal death (0·78, 0·46-1·32) or a composite of pregnancy complications (1·20, 0·75-1·90). For closure versus non-closure of the peritoneum there was no evidence of a difference in any outcomes relating to symptoms associated with pelvic adhesions such as infertility (0·80, 0·61-1·06). For chromic catgut versus polyglactin-910 sutures there was no evidence of a difference in the main comparisons for adverse pregnancy outcomes in a subsequent pregnancy, such as uterine rupture (3·05, 0·32-29·29). Overall, severe adverse outcomes were uncommon in these settings.InterpretationAlthough our study was not powered to detect modest differences in rare but serious events, there was no evidence to favour one technique over another. Other considerations will probably affect clinical practice, such as the time and cost saving of different approaches.FundingUK Medical Research Council and the Department for International Development.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of closed incision negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) compared with standard dressings in preventing surgical site infection (SSI) in obese women undergoing caesarean section.DesignMulticentre, pragmatic, randomised, controlled, parallel group, superiority trial.SettingFour Australian tertiary hospitals between October 2015 and November 2019.ParticipantsEligible women had a pre-pregnancy body mass index of 30 or greater and gave birth by elective or semi-urgent caesarean section.Intervention2035 consenting women were randomised before the caesarean procedure to closed incision NPWT (n=1017) or standard dressing (n=1018). Allocation was concealed until skin closure.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was cumulative incidence of SSI. Secondary outcomes included depth of SSI (superficial, deep, or organ/body space), rates of wound complications (dehiscence, haematoma, seroma, bleeding, bruising), length of stay in hospital, and rates of dressing related adverse events. Women and clinicians were not masked, but the outcome assessors and statistician were blinded to treatment allocation. The pre-specified primary intention to treat analysis was based on a conservative assumption of no SSI for a minority of women (n=28) with missing outcome data. Post hoc sensitivity analyses included best case analysis and complete case analysis.ResultsIn the primary intention to treat analysis, SSI occurred in 75 (7.4%) women treated with closed incision NPWT and in 99 (9.7%) women with a standard dressing (risk ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 1.01; P=0.06). Post hoc sensitivity analyses to explore the effect of missing data found the same direction of effect (closed incision NPWT reducing SSI), with statistical significance. Blistering occurred in 40/996 (4.0%) women who received closed incision NPWT and in 23/983 (2.3%) who received the standard dressing (risk ratio 1.72, 1.04 to 2.85; P=0.03).ConclusionProphylactic closed incision NPWT for obese women after caesarean section resulted in a 24% reduction in the risk of SSI (3% reduction in absolute risk) compared with standard dressings. This difference was close to statistical significance, but it likely underestimates the effectiveness of closed incision NPWT in this population. The results of the conservative primary analysis, multivariable adjusted model, and post hoc sensitivity analysis need to be considered alongside the growing body of evidence of the benefit of closed incision NPWT and given the number of obese women undergoing caesarean section globally. The decision to use closed incision NPWT must also be weighed against the increases in skin blistering and economic considerations and should be based on shared decision making with patients.Trial registrationANZCTR identifier 12615000286549.

Project description:Introduction Caesarean sections (CS) feature prominently in obstetric care and have impacted positively on maternal / neonatal outcomes globally including Ghana. However, in spite of documented increasing CS rates in the country, there are no studies assessing the adequacy of post-CS pain control. This study assessed the adequacy of post-CS pain management as well as factors influencing this outcome. Additionally, post-CS analgesia prescription and serving habits of doctors and nurses were also described to help fill existing knowledge gaps. Methods Pain scores of 400 randomly selected and consenting post-CS women at a tertiary facility in Ghana were assessed at 6–12 hours post-CS at rest and with movement and at 24–36 hours post-CS with movement using a validated visual analog scale (VAS) from February 1, 2015 to April 8, 2015. Participant characteristics including age, marital status and duration of CS were obtained using pretested questionnaires and patient records review. Descriptive statistics were presented as frequencies and proportions. Associations between background characteristics and the outcome variables of adequacy of pain control at 6–12 hours post-CS at rest and with movement and at 24–36 hours post-CS with movement were analysed using Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests and logistic regression methods. Adequate pain control was defined as VAS scores ≤5. Results At 6–12 hours post-CS (at rest), equal proportions of participants had adequate and inadequate pain control (50.1% vrs 49.9%). Over the same time period but with movement, pain control was deemed inadequate in 93% of respondents (369/396). Women who had one previous surgery [OR 0.47 95%CI 0.27, 0.82; p = 0.008] and those whose CS lasted longer than 45 mins [OR 0.39 95% CI 0.24, 0.62; p<0.001] had lower odds of reporting adequate pain control. Women prescribed 12-hourly and 8-hourly doses of pethidine had only 23.5% (12/51) and 10.3% (3/29) served as prescribed respectively. At 24–36 hours post CS, adequate pain control was reported by 85.3% (326/382) of participants. Conclusions Pain management was deemed inadequate within the first 12 hours post-CS with potential implications for early mother-child interaction. Appreciable numbers of participants did not have their analgesics served as prescribed. Adjunct pain control measures should be explored and healthcare workers must be encouraged to pay more attention to patients’ pain relief needs.

Dataset Information

Caesarean section: could different transverse abdominal incision techniques influence postpartum pain and subsequent quality of life? A systematic review.

Publications

Caesarean section: could different transverse abdominal incision techniques influence postpartum pain and subsequent quality of life? A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets