Impact single versus double layer uterine closure in caesarean section to uterine rupture

Budi Iman Santoso, Raymond Surya, Rima Irwinda


Caesarean section (CS) is one of the most frequent delivery methods in the world whereas the rates of CS were varied according to developing (from 3.5 to 29.2%) and developed countries (21.1%). The study aims to known the impact of single versus double layer uterine closure to uterine rupture in the history of cesarean section (CS). In this case report, the clinical question is single versus double-layer uterine closure on the previous CS, gives better outcome to reduce the risk of uterine rupture. To answer this question, we search the evidence from Pub Med and Cochrane database with the keywords: “cesarean section" and "uterine rupture" and “uterine closure”. The inclusion criteria are written in English and focused comparing single and double layer uterine closure to uterine rupture in the previous CS. From the searching literature, we found 3 systematic reviews and 23 articles which were relevant to the topic. After screening the abstract and language, we got 2 systematic reviews and 4 articles. At the end, only 4 articles consisting of 1 systematic review and 3 articles were included to be appraised. Based on evidences, single layer uterine closure did not increase the risk of uterine rupture. Apart from that, shorter operative times and lower estimated blood loss became the superiority of single-layer uterine closure.


CS, Single versus double-layer uterine closure, Uterine ruptures

Full Text:



Betran AP, Merialdi M, Lauer JA, Shun WB, Thomas J, van Look P, et al. Rates of cesarean section: analysis of global, regional, and national estimates. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007;21:98-113.

Liu S, Liston RM, Joseph KS, Heaman M, Sauve R, Kramer MS. Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term. CMAJ. 2007;176:455-60.

Jauniaux E, Jurkovic D. Placenta accreta: pathogenesis of a 20th century iatrogenic uterine disease. Placenta. 2012;33:244-51.

CAESAR study collaborative group: caesarean section surgical techniques: a randomized factorial trial (CAESAR). BJOG. 2010;117(11):1366.

Lal K, Tsomo P. Comparative study of single layer and conventional closure of uterine incision in cesarean section. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 1998;27:349-52.

Bujold E, Bujold C, Hamilton EF, Harel F, Gauthier RJ. The impact of a single layer or double layer closure on uterine rupture. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186:1326-30.

Roberge S, Demers S, Berghella V, Chailet N, Moore L, Bujold E. Impact of single versus double layer closure on adverse outcomes and uterine scar defect: a systematic review and metaanalysis. AJOG. 2014;211(5):453-60.

Gyamfi C, Juhasz G, Gyamfi P, Blumenfeld Y, Stone JL. Single-versus double-layer uterine incision closure and uterine rupture. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Med. 2006;19(10):639-43.

Durnwald C, Mercer B. Uterine rupture, perioperative and perinatal morbidity after single-layer and double-layer closure at cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;189:925-9.

Bujold E, Goyet M, Marcoux S, Brassard N, Cormier B, Hamilton E, et al. The role of uterine closure in the risk of uterine rupture. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116:43-50.

Cahill AG, Stamilio DM, Odibo AO, Peipert J, Stevens E, Macones GA. Racial disparity in the success and complications of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111:654-8.

Hesselman S, Hogberg U, Ekholm-Selling K, Rassjo EB, Jonsson M. The risk of uterine rupture is not increased with single-compared with double-layer closure: a Swedish cohort study. BJOG. 2014;122:1535-41.

Landon MB, Spong CY, Thom E, Hauth JC, Bloom SL, Varner MW, et al. For national institutes of child health and human development maternal-fetal medicine units network. The MFMU caesarean registry. Risk of uterine rupture with a trial of labor in women with multiple and single prior cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108:12-20.

Stamilio D, DeFranco E, Pare E, Odibo AO, Peipert JF, Allsworth JE, et al. Short inter-pregnancy interval: risk of uterine rupture and complications of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110:1075-82.

Shipp TD, Zelop CM, Repke TJ, Cohen A, Caughey AB, Lieberman E. Intrapartum uterine rupture and dehiscence in patients with prior lower uterine segment vertical and transverse incisions. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;94:735-40.