Rectus muscle re-approximation in cesarean section - a surgical dilemma: to close or not to close?

Orkun Cetin, Kübra Ak, Tuba Bozhüyük Sahin, İpek Dokurel Çetin
{"title":"Rectus muscle re-approximation in cesarean section - a surgical dilemma: to close or not to close?","authors":"Orkun Cetin, Kübra Ak, Tuba Bozhüyük Sahin, İpek Dokurel Çetin","doi":"10.5603/gpl.98027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Cesarean section is one of the most common operations worldwide since decades. However, the optimum surgical cesarean section technique is still being discussed. Closure or non-closure of the rectus muscles is also unclear among obstetricians. We aimed to evaluate the effect of rectus muscle re-approximation (RMR) in cesarean section on postoperative pain among singleton primi gravida elective cesarean sections at term.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The current study was planned as a prospective, blinded, randomized controlled trial. A total of 279 elective primi gravida singleton cesarean sections; 142 undergoing RMR and 137 not-undergoing RMR were included in the study. All participants were managed with our clinic's postoperative protocol and obstetric outcomes were also recorded. The patients' pain was assessed face to face 24 hours and 48 hours after operation by using visual analog scale (VAS) score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The elective singleton primi gravida cesarean sections with and without RMR exhibited no significant difference with respect to maternal age, Body Mass Index, delivery week and other obstetric outcomes. The VAS scores at 24th and 48th hours (67 ± 24 versus 69 ± 25, p: 0.635; 47 ± 25 versus 52 ± 26, p: 0,126, respectively) were similar between the RMR and non-RMR group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RMR has not any negative effect on postoperative pain, operation time, analgesic use and hospital stay in singleton primi gravida elective CS at term. Additionally, RMR did not lead to any adverse postoperative risks such as increased blood loss and sub-rectus hematoma.</p>","PeriodicalId":94021,"journal":{"name":"Ginekologia polska","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ginekologia polska","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/gpl.98027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Cesarean section is one of the most common operations worldwide since decades. However, the optimum surgical cesarean section technique is still being discussed. Closure or non-closure of the rectus muscles is also unclear among obstetricians. We aimed to evaluate the effect of rectus muscle re-approximation (RMR) in cesarean section on postoperative pain among singleton primi gravida elective cesarean sections at term.

Material and methods: The current study was planned as a prospective, blinded, randomized controlled trial. A total of 279 elective primi gravida singleton cesarean sections; 142 undergoing RMR and 137 not-undergoing RMR were included in the study. All participants were managed with our clinic's postoperative protocol and obstetric outcomes were also recorded. The patients' pain was assessed face to face 24 hours and 48 hours after operation by using visual analog scale (VAS) score.

Results: The elective singleton primi gravida cesarean sections with and without RMR exhibited no significant difference with respect to maternal age, Body Mass Index, delivery week and other obstetric outcomes. The VAS scores at 24th and 48th hours (67 ± 24 versus 69 ± 25, p: 0.635; 47 ± 25 versus 52 ± 26, p: 0,126, respectively) were similar between the RMR and non-RMR group.

Conclusions: RMR has not any negative effect on postoperative pain, operation time, analgesic use and hospital stay in singleton primi gravida elective CS at term. Additionally, RMR did not lead to any adverse postoperative risks such as increased blood loss and sub-rectus hematoma.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
剖宫产术中的直肌再贴合--手术难题:贴合还是不贴合?
目的:几十年来,剖腹产一直是全球最常见的手术之一。然而,最佳的剖腹产手术技术仍在讨论之中。产科医生对直肌的闭合与否也不清楚。我们的目的是评估剖宫产术中直肌再贴合(RMR)对足月选择剖宫产的单胎初产妇术后疼痛的影响:本研究是一项前瞻性、盲法、随机对照试验。共有 279 例初产妇单胎择期剖宫产,其中 142 例接受 RMR,137 例未接受 RMR。所有参与者均按照本诊所的术后方案进行管理,并记录了产科结果。术后 24 小时和 48 小时,采用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分对患者的疼痛进行面对面评估:结果:采用和不采用RMR的单胎初产妇剖宫产术在产妇年龄、体重指数、分娩周数和其他产科结果方面没有明显差异。在第 24 和 48 小时的 VAS 评分(分别为 67 ± 24 对 69 ± 25,P:0.635;47 ± 25 对 52 ± 26,P:0.126)上,RMR 组和非 RMR 组相似:结论:RMR 对临产时选择 CS 的单胎初产妇的术后疼痛、手术时间、镇痛剂使用和住院时间没有任何负面影响。此外,RMR 不会导致任何不良的术后风险,如失血量增加和直肠下血肿。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Assessment of emotions in pregnancy: introduction of the Pregnancy Anxiety and Stress Rating Scale (PASRS) and its application in the context of hospitalization. Baseline data on distribution of human papillomavirus (HPV-) genotypes in cervical samples of gynecological patients before implementation of population-based HPV- vaccination program in Polande implementation of population-based HPV vaccination program in Poland. Comparison of Polymerase Chain Reaction Method with Culture Method in Antenatal Group B Streptococcus Screening. Dietary patterns of Polish pregnant women in reference to prepregnancy BMI and gestational weight gain. Impact of body mass index and gestational weight gain on cesarean delivery rates: a comparative study of dinoprostone-induced vs spontaneous labor.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1