DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20171403

Comparative study of uterine repair during caesarean section: exteriorization repair versus in-situ repair

Lakshmi Priya, Reddi Rani P., Lopamudra B

Abstract


Background: Cesarean section is one of the most common major obstetrical operation performed worldwide and the rates of cesarean section are increasing. It is associated with both intra-operative and post-operative complications. Many variations in surgical methods have been devised to decrease the adverse effects and morbidity. One such method is technique of uterine repair after delivery of the fetus and placenta by exteriorizing the uterus or in-situ repair.

Methods: A prospective comparative study was conducted in the department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at MGMCRI Pondicherry over 18 months from March 2015 to August 2016. Two hundred women undergoing caesarean section were assigned to 2 groups. Group 1 (Exteriorization) 100 women and Group 2 (In-situ repair) 100 women. Intra-op and post-operative complications were assessed in both groups and compared.

Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to age, parity, gestational age and type of cesarean section. There was no significant difference between two groups with regard to fall in Hb, operating time, mean drop in pulse rate and blood pressure, nausea, vomiting and intra-op pain. There was significant difference in blood loss during surgery in in-situ repair, P value was <0.001 highly significant and also statistically significant increase in transfusion rates in in-situ group with a p value of 0.038. Postoperative complications like febrile morbidity was significantly more in in-situ repair P=0.046. There was no significant difference in other variables like urinary tract infection, surgical site infection, endometritis and hospital stay.

Conclusions: Both techniques are accepted methods of uterine repair. Technique of repair depends on surgeon’s choice and clinical situation. Exteriorization repair is a valid option with no significant increase in morbidity compared to In-situ repair especially in cases where exposure of lower uterine segment is difficult, there is extension of incision and difficulty in achieving hemostasis.

Keywords


Cesarean section, Exteriorization, In-situ repair

Full Text:

PDF

References


Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Zhang J, Gülmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The Increasing Trend in Cesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS one. 2016;11(02).

World Health Organisation. WHO statement on cesarean section rates. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 2015.

Ezechi OC, Kalu BK, Njokanma FO, Nwokoro CA, Okeke GC. Uterine incision at cesarean section: A randomized comparative study of intraperitoneal closure and closure after temporary exteriorization. West Afr J Med. 2005;24:41-43.

Das S, Das P, Mahli A, Biswas S. Comparative study of uterine repair during cesarean section-Intraabdominal Vs exteriorization of uterus. ISOR-JDMS. 2015;14(1):05-8.

Edi‐Osagie EC, Hopkins RE, Ogbo V, Lockhat‐Clegg F, Ayeko M, Akpala WO, Mayers FN. Uterine exteriorisation at caesarean section: influence on maternal morbidity. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 1998;105(10):1070-8.

Zaphiratos V, Gorge RB, Boyd JC, Habib AS. Uterine exteriorization compared with in-situ repair for cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Anesth. 2015;62(11):1209-20.

Nasir H, Imran R, Naz I, Saif N. Uterine exteriorization compared with insitu repair at cesarean delivery. Journal of Rawalpindi Medical College. 2011;15(2):110-12.

Shiya A, Akhtar S, Khan S. Comparison of intra-operative and post-operative complications of intraabdominal versus extra abdominal uterine repair at cesarean delivery. Pak Armed Forces Med J. 2015;65:191-94.

El-Khayat W, Elsharkawi M, Hassan AA. randomized controlled trial of uterine exteriorization versus in-situ repair of the uterine incision during cesarean delivery. Int J of Gynecol Obstet. 2014;127:163-66.

Coutinho IC, Ramos de Amorim MM, Katz L, Bandeira de Ferraz AA. Uterine exteriorization compared with in situ repair at cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(3):639-47.

Magannet EF, Dodson MK, Albert JR. Blood loss at the time of cesarean section by method of placental removal and exteriorization versus in-situ repair of uterine incision. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1993;177:389-92.

Jacobs-Jokhan D, Hofmeyr G. Extra-abdominal versus intra-abdominal repair of the uterine incision at cesarean section. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews; 2004;4.